JK 739 
13 G5 

Copy 2 


FT MEADE 
GenCo11 



r oV 





>: 





'ey 




<^v 4 ^ __ _ 

9 

* ?s y ~yym/ y r % *. 

*i®** ^ v *iir# .*r ***** v 

*. ^ a ^ a* .*«&*«.'• ♦. 




;. & % vi 





t ■*«■<* ., 

* J > ' r ka, * 

* -«?’ *. *• 


o t » 


(-0 Sar/r??*,* tS j'p *^^W* T«, fO v? 

W ; vj§|* % 0 < :^m-* W 

vBmkyl vsaEr* 4 <3* jP^ 

■ v®*>° \^/ v^R*V < 

* ♦■» * .VVa- ^ ^ **^8h&'* % A* 

• ** \ •jqP,* 


* • • 



*, %»„<? 


* *» 


^ o 0 **♦ 

* If •f 5, 

•&/ " 


o 


•v> ^ # * * ' V v N , 

(OP' * * * * * *£) t 6 * » *, '«£ t 

C. g JLmZ* c> •‘U^rvT# 1 Vp C V 

v t xwr//s*2_ „ *N < *y ft * 




& V 



» 0 ^ ‘.HR* 3QTO „» 0 ^ . 

► I*®* ^ v ©•iJJ*?* *flr • • *** ^ V % ♦^L% 

* w i^SmX W 

“ ^'V °. 

* ay *'«''»’ r 4 

^ ^3 '»* .* A 

o* A‘^. o 0 ^ J? 

*» i 






^ ^ «> «r» \ 

* - .0^ « ♦ * V A > n**** tT* 

\ \/ ^ 

.; /% : -^** /\ : -3 •* ^ : 
••A* /V aA* *.7* ati T7« /vs* “< 





v * «■ 


jj, **'"r~V« > * *0^ ^O 1 'e * T ® a 1 ^ ^ *' 

4®^ •SSasLSr^ " c°" 





« « • 


4,0 ^£. * 

%/*»'’** ’* 

*- %. ^ Aster . % ^ . 

* 

* V - 



Kt * ^ 

*•' *« V c , 
*•#„ A *y .*«*, 


r •• • 



v # .m; «; 

■'At-, ..Ay Mia m 'Oi, A . * ^ a 


#0^ 4 * Vlf ♦ T 0_ 4(V , 

0 *Vy^ v o # 

^ ,/ ^- * -a 4 * •» 

; ; 

.° .Jp^ - 


** ■’yy * v < 
>*. *^0* .. 



* • 


.A v *y 



V ••• , * 

V -* 


•• .* 





^ 0 X 


a > 

to © jp « 40 

> * . ' ft* >fe 

* Q> *%» *yZar*\* jy 0 * 

.♦° ... V *•’ y ..._% '•*• 







* \ J 
%<& ; 



4 
%> 

A * 

# 

.*-✓ *•* «* "> *. v ** ^ - ^ 

■ .>¥4 f <r_ ,© ,* 

*mMh.° *.y . 

> VKRy/ a ^ > ' S '\_ # V ^, *• 

i < * «U O 'o a k * ' C> « 

► *f» * * VJ* * C ® * * •« *<*. 

^0 V °b k ^b 0 < 

ft^ ^ o tO t 1 , * * 4 0 

♦ K* ^ • 'C-^w/Lr » <ft. *A • fe- / Tl^Ssv ^ * 

<X * O * . . 9 "*t<yt I A- if' «? Ay^ t ^ 

4V rU * # 9 Af * f , % • O * **+ Cl* 

V % c. 0* *•♦*# ^> ^ 

-. \ y ,^vVv. ‘ *. j, ,‘ytffcv. % y .: 

: sv ^ -mm° w ?JHsl* ^ y 


•* y 

v' . 

' ** ^ ‘ 

. v-T ; 

* **% ; . 
t» AT * 

«* cr a 




_ - A*% 

%. *•••• y <u 

* **» y *i^> ** 

fe . •> bt * •#£§^101 
«>« jp-r. 

* * ^ * ^&y/iU2r % 

* & <t. nzm*.* 



« • 


. y^ • 

♦ y v • 



aV-V - 

V & * 


»* 


P' . 


* # t 


^ #e • ♦ * A <v * 

•**-•• - X>. .*!*4 V 

O jv * *P 

<*. * rt, ftN « 4SsSjAn%.* •j’’ 

•< »; '•bj? ; 

4 |l0 *?V * 

h O «-> % * w«' y 






r ** * 




# ^ . ^4* 

: W - ■ 

* rf-'V *.x/ 




•\<y V* 


y°- 


»«« 


» * 4 



*0' 4* ** 

* AT* >.<t^.« 

f *’ *r> cp * 


* A • f\. * A 

y .. °4- **-^ ; A°' 

V I* ■* *. p, .0^ . 

^ & *VQB9^** ^ *! 

: fM- /■* 


o .^OT ? * y v *V y% •fW. ; y*v '-1 

^•*'** **y / v *-^. a 4 % 

* „ t v . c u ,>*,•, vj y -^u' v 


r ot‘ 


O SP^A 

<) ^ * I 

^0 **• ** 




*bt> 


0 V v v .»* - # 


t ^V #"* "\j^5 r 3r ♦ 

y .. °a *»••’ ^o 
.. «, ■ <'<xw%r. ^ y 0 •lXSl t r> 

* w ^y : mm\ * 

*»* 





.* y% ^ 


^.*w* a° % '“•*• y t ♦T7r* y ^ 

l . <- °_. y .*^hV. v . c° 




5-o< :, 



^ <*5 

« «i»v * a 
* wrk&vw •* _ 

8s uf * ji v *y . >4 tiv 







V’ % **'. s ^’’ a0° 

v* **^L*+ *<r *■ 

• ^ y » vstor . % y .*»* 








“DARK LANTERN DICK;” 

HIS RECORD 

CONTRASTED WITH THE DOCTRINE THAT 


PUBLIC OFFICE IS A PUBLIC TRUST 


A Letter to the President 


BY 

JOHN M. GLOVER, M. C., 

MISSOURI. 

\ \ 

' > 



WASHINGTON, D. C 

R. O POUKINHORN, PRINTER. 


. ■ TLw; 


















. 













t . 
































. 



























. ;4 











5, f’' ■' 




- 


I . . 













Washington, D. C., May 31, 1887. 

To the President of the United States : 

Sir :— I had recent occasion to publish in the New York 
World, and other leading papers of the country, a letter 
severely arraigning your appointee for Surveyor of the Port 
of the city of St. Louis. A libel suit brought against me 
for the publication of this letter—a suit which could have 
had but one inspiration, and no motive, except to intimidate 
me in the discharge of my public duty—has enabled me to 
develope, by sworn testimony, things which have long been 
known in our community. I submit the evidence herewith 
for your candid consideration. 

Chapter One, consists of a destroying impeachment of the 
general character and reputation of the appointee ; and a 
general impeachment is possible, as you know, only in very 
bad cases. Your special attention is called to the character 
and standing of the witnesses : United States Senator Arm¬ 
strong ; Congressman R. Graham Frost; State Superintend¬ 
ent of Insurance, Carr ; State Coal Oil Inspector, Baggott; 
vice-President of the Police Board, Blair ; Judge of the Court 
of Appeals, Gantt; William H. Mayo, for ten years, Secretary 
of the Democratic State Central Committe, of Missouri; City 
Councilman, Steber; all Democratic officials, high in the con¬ 
fidence of the party, and the people, with many others of like 
prominence. The whole makes a withering arraignment which 
could be made successfully of few persons out of jail. 

In Chapter Two, the appointee is convicted by the solemn 
testimony of N. O. Nelson, a man of the highest standing 
and reputation in the community; and of W. A. Reid, his 
superintendent of repairs, of having attempted (since his 
appointment by you,) to defraud the Government out of 


4 


about $2,200 in a total disbursement of $4,300. The evi¬ 
dence shows lie succeeded in defrauding the Government of 
the sum of $900, and that his failure to succeed as to the 
larger amount is due solely to the fact that the fraud was 
detected. 

Chapter Three, comprises the most damaging disclosures 
of all. By means of a bold conspiracy involving fictitious 
payees, pretended mortgages without consideration, fraud¬ 
ulent deeds, and bogus foreclosures, supplemented by a per¬ 
jured affidavit, made by the appointee, and filed in the office 
of the Secretary of the Treasury, he succeeded in deliber¬ 
ately swindling the Government out of the sum of $25,000. 
The abstract of title showing these conveyances is set out, 
and discloses a manifest fraud upon its face. The deposi¬ 
tion of the appointee, and the testimony of his partner in 
business, which are given in full, amount to a comxdete con¬ 
fession, and incidentally disclose shocking instances of per¬ 
sonal dishonesty on the part of the appointee in his private 
business. 

I have a deliberate purpose in making this letter public, 
which I can explain, but for which I have no apology. I de¬ 
sire to invite the public judgment upon the state of facts ; 
to reinforce my efforts to secure the removal of this man by 
the more powerful influence of public opinion, which will 
not listen with patience to professions of zeal for the purity 
of the public service while such as he remain in places of 
power and influence. 

I think these facts show to the satisfaction of any candid 
mind that the appointee is unfit to occupy any place of pub¬ 
lic trust, and also that he is indebted to the Government in 
a large amount on account of frauds committed previous to 
his appointment. It would follow as a necessary conclusion 
that he should be removed, and that suit should be insti¬ 
tuted to recover the money due the Government. To do 
otherwise would be to inflict an unmerited reproach upon 


5 


our people and to connive at tlie loss of the revenues of the 
Government,—a course which is not conceivable on the part 
of the present President of the United States. 

You must concede, of course, that a man, whose general 
character and reputation can be impeached, is no proper 
officer to place over a self-respecting people. There is no 
room for difference of opinion about that. In regard to the 
fraud in the Busby settlement, the facts are transparent, 
and no reputable lawyer in the United States will venture 
to say over his own signature, after reading the evidence 
that I mis-state its effect. 

Under these circumstances action is a duty to the citizen 
and the tax-payer, and the people confidently expect it at 
your hands. 

I have the honor to urge this man’s removal and the in¬ 
stitution of suit against him to collect the money due the 
United States. 

Your obedient servant, 

JOHN M. GLOVER, M. C. 





CHAPTER FIRST. 


David H. Armstrong. 

My name is David H. Armstrong, and I reside in this city. 

Q. You have resided a long time in Missouri, have yon 
not ? A. Within a few weeks of fifty years, sir. 

Q. Have you resided most of that time in the city of St. 
Louis ? All of that time, sir, in this city. 

Q. You represented Missouri in the United States Senate 
at one time, did you not ? A. I did. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case, Richard D. 
Lancaster, personally ? A. Yes, sir, I know him. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation was in the 
city of St. Louis for a period anterior, say one year before 
the present time; can you say that you know what his rep¬ 
utation as—not what it was, but whether you know what it 
was ? A. Well, I know what the general impression has 
been among the class of men with whom I associate in that 
regard. 

Q. Will you state whether his reputation was good or bad ? 
A. I think that it is not good, sir, from the impression that 
I have gathered of him. I don’t think he is an honest gen¬ 
tleman. 

Q. Whom did you get that impression from? A. Oh, it 
has been accumulating for many years. 


E. T. Howard. 

My name is E. T. Howakd, and I reside in this city. 

Q.‘ What is your business ? A. I am a manufacturer. 

Q, How long have you lived in the city of St. Louis ? A. 
I have lived here all of my life, except five years. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff \ A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you known him ? A. For about two 
years. 




8 


Q. Do yon know what his general reputation has been in 
the city of St. Louis for the past few years—can yon say 
that yon know it? A. Well, I don’t know it except from 
what I have heard. 

Q. Have 'yon heard enough to be able to say that yon now 
know what he is generally thought of—what his general 
reputation is ? A. Yes, sir ; I have heard enough. 

Q,. Is it good or bad V A. What I heard of him was not 
very good ; it was a bad reputation. 


Alfred Carr. 

My name is Alfred Carr, and I am Superintendent of In¬ 
surance of the State of Missouri. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case, Richard D. 
Lancaster? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you known him ? A. By reputation, 
fifteen or twenty years. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is in this 
community in which he lives ? A. I believe I do. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. I think it is bad. 


William Baggott. 

My name is William Baggott, and I reside in this city. 

Q. What position do you now hold officially ? A. Iam a 
coal oil inspector. 

Q. Do you know what the general reputation of the 
plaintiff has been prior to the institution of this suit in this 
community—whether it has been good or bad ? 

Mr. Lattghlin. For what ? 

Mr. GIloyee. For political and personal honesty. 

The Witness. I think I do. 

Q. What is it? A. It has been bad. I saw Glover a 
couple of days ago, and he told me that he was going to ex¬ 
amine me as a witness, and he asked me what I would swear 
to on the witness-stand, and I told him in substance that I 
would not believe Mr. Lancaster on oath where he was in 
any way interested. 




9 


Thomas T. Gantt. 

My name is Thomas T. Gantt, and I reside in this city. 

Q. IIow long have yon lived in the city of St. Louis ? 
A. Upwards of forty years. 

Q. Were you judge of the Court of Appeals at one time ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case ? A. The plain¬ 
tiff, I believe, is Lancaster ? 

Q. Yes, sir; Richard D. Lancaster. A. I know him very 
slightly. 

Q. Do you know him by reputation? A. Well, I have 
heard him spoken of. 

Q. Now, I will ask you what his reputation is—whether 
it is good or bad ? A. Well, I am bound to say that it is 
bad. 


William H. Little. 

My name is Wm. H. Little, and my business is that of a 
journalist. 

Q. On what paper ? A. The Evening Chronicle. 

Q. How long have you livecjf in the city ? A. About two- 
and-a-half years. * 

Q. During that time have you known the plaintiff? A. 
I have not known him. 

Q. Have you known him by reputation ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is in the 
community where he lives ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. It is bad. 


Laclede J. Howard. 

My name is Laclede J. Howard, and I reside in this city. 

Q. What is your occupation ? A. I am the president of 
the Evans and Howard Eire Brick Company. 

Q. How long have you lived in St. Louis ? A. I was born 
here. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case ? A. I do. 

Q. How long have you known him ? A. More than ten 
years. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is in the com¬ 
munity in which he lives ? A. Yes, sir. 

2q 




10 


Q. Is it good or bad ? A. I will say that it is bad—very 
bad. 

Q. Bad for what ? A. Bad for honesty and dealing squarely 
as a man. 

Q. Who said it was bad ? A. I say so, in my opinion. 

Q. Anybody else ? A. Yes, sir; I never heard any one 
speak well of him. 


Samuel Simmons. 

My name is Samuel Simmons, and I reside at 2927 Lucas 
avenue, in this city. 

Q. Wliat is your occupation ? A. I am a lawyer. 

Q. How long have you lived in St. Louis ? A. Regularly 
since 1851, except during the time I was absent from the 
city during the war. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff, Richard D. Lancaster ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you known him? A. I have known 
him quite a long time ; I couldn’t fix the date at which I 
commenced knowing him ; I knew him prior to 1860—dur¬ 
ing the 50’s and down to the present time. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is in the 
community in which he lives ? A. Well, I might say that 
I know of his general reputation, as well as I know any¬ 
body’s. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. In one respect it is not good, 
and in another respect it would be decidedly bad, I would 
say. 

Q. Please explain ? A. I speak of Mr. Lancaster politic¬ 
ally—in reference to his political actions and efforts ; his 
reputation is decidedly bad in that direction. 

A. In what respect was it that you said it was not good ? 
A. Well, he is not honest in his dealings in managing affairs 
of parties in promoting men to office, good and honest men 
to positions in the community, I don’t think. It would 
be a difficult thing to commence and name them. I think 
he might commence with himself ; he was very earnest 
in presenting himself for a position that I don’t think he 
ought to have aspired to, because the community regarded 
him as an unfit man to fill the position. 

Q. To what office ? A. The office of Surveyor of Customs. 

Q. Wasn’t your opinion of Lancaster’s bad political char¬ 
acter based upon those stories that were told in 1876 about 
the levying of contributions ? A. Ho, sir ; I don’t think so. 



11 


Q. What was it based upon then—what other stories ? 
A. Upon Lancaster’s general repute. 

Q. For what ? A. Well the community forms an estimate 
of a man’s character by living alongside of him and seeing 
his actions. 

Q. What were the specific things that they charged 
against him, that they talked about % A. That he was an 
arch political conspirator. 

Q. Is that all they told % A. And a bad man. 

Q. Is that all that they said ? A. Well, that is enough. 

Q. Is that all they said ? A. That sums up everything 
that can be said about a man. 


William H. Mayo. 

My name is William H. Mayo and I reside in the city. 

Q. How long have you resided in this city % A. Since 
1871 ; about fifteen, sixteen or seventeen years. 

Q. Were you at that time, or at any time, officially con¬ 
nected with the democratic organization % A. I was for ten 
years its secretary. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case, Richard D. 
Lancaster? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Can you state that you know what his general reputa¬ 
tion has been in the community in which he lives, for some 
years past ; I don’t ask you what it is, but can you state 
that you know what it is ? A. Well, I should say it is bad. 

Q. Then you do know it % A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And what is it f A. It is bad. 


P. C. Bulkeley. 

Q. How long have you resided in St. Louis ? A. I came 
here in 1867. 

Q. Have you lived here consecutively ever since % A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case ? A. Mr. Lan¬ 
caster % 

Q. Yes, sir ; R. D. Lancaster. A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is among 
those wdio know him ? A. I do. 

Q. Is it good or bad \ A. It is bad. 




12 


Henry M. Snyder. 

My name is Henry M. Snyder, and I reside at 2317 
Chestnut street in this city, and have resided here 51 years. 

Q. What is yonr occupation ? A. Stove, tin sheet-iron, 
plumbing and furnace business. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff, R. D. Lancaster? A. Very 
well. 

Q. Have you known him long ? A. Yes, sir ; for a num¬ 
ber of years. 

Q. Do you know his reputation in the community—his 
general reputation among those who have known him, 
whether it is good or bad ? A. It is bad. 


Richard S. Janes. 

My name is Richard S. Janes, and I reside in this city, 
and am a foundry man. 

Q. Connected with what establishment? A. Bridge, 
Beach & Co. 

Q. What is your office or position there ? A. I am super¬ 
intendent. 

Q. How long have you lived in St. Louis ? A. several 
years. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff, Richard D. Lancaster ? A. 
I am not acquainted with him. 

Q. Do you know him by reputation ? A. O, he is a man 
that I have heard a great deal of, yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is among 
those who know him in this community ? A. O, I have 
heard it discussed every place over town, I reckon. 

Q. Do you know whether it is good or bad? A. All I 
know is what I heard and read. 

Q. From that can you say that you know what his repu¬ 
tation is ? A. Well, if I go from what I read and hear I 
would say that his reputation is bad. 


August Thomas. 

My name is Gus. Thomas and I reside in this city. 

Q. What is your business ? A. I am a newspaper report¬ 
er. 




13 


Q. How long have you been engaged in journalism ? A. 
Off and on for 8 years. 

Q.WVere you in the city of St. Louis in 1880 ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Did you know the plaintiff then, personally, or by 
reputation? A. I did not know him personally; I knew 
him by reputation. 

Q. Can you state what his general reputation was in the 
community in which he lived at that time ? A. I can state 
only in a political sense. 

Q. Well, in any sense ? A. His reputation was that of 
being a corrupt man politically, as far as I was able to know 
him. 

Q. That was in 1880? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You move around a good deal among people in your 
business, do you not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you have a wide acquaintance ? A. Fairly so. 

Q. Who did you ever hear say that Lancaster was proliti- 
cally corrupt ? A. My information in that respect came in 
this way : in 1880 I was doing cartoons for a paper printed 
here, a campaign paper called the St. Louis World , and 
among other cartoons that I was instructed to make at that 
time was one representing Mr. Lancaster as a member of the 
Dark Lantern King, selling the nomination for a judgeship 
for $2,000. 

Q. Who instructed you ? A. The editor of the paper. 

Q. What was his name ? A. Emery S. Foster. 


Carl Baenzer. 

My name is Carl Daenzer, and I reside in this city. 

Q. How long have you resided here ? A. Since the spring 
of 1852. 

Q What is your business ? A. I am a newspaper man ; 
I edit the Anzeiger. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case, Diehard D. 
Lancaster? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is in the 
community in which he lives and is known ? A. As a citi¬ 
zen, or politician? 

Q. For personal and political honesty? A. Well, as a 
politician, I think his reputation is not good. 



14 


Daniel M. Frost. 

My name is Daniel M. Frost, and I reside at 1711 Wash 
street, in this city. 

Q. How long have you resided in this city ? A. I have 
had a legal residence here since 1851. 

Q. How long have you known the plaintiff, if you know 
him, Richard D. Lancaster ? A. My impression is that I 
became acquainted with him in 1853, but it may have been a 
year before or after that. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is in the 
community in which he lives, whether it is good or bad ? 
A. Yes, sir ; I might say I do. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. The reputation that I have 
heard of him is bad in certain respects. I could hardly go 
back through 34 years and tell everybody that I heard 
speak in terms of reprobation of Mr. Lancaster’s political 
methods ; I would not undertake to do that at all; I might 
say the talk in that regard has been very general and I will 
go so far as to say that I never hear a reputable democrat 
speak well of Mr. Lancaster’s political methods. 

Q. You have known the plaintiff how long? A. Tenor 
twelve years. 

Q. Do you know what' his general reputation is in the 
community in which he lives ? A. Yes, sir ; I think I do. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. In the political aspect of it I 
believe it is bad. 


Tames L. Blair. 

Q. What is your present official position here? A. Lam 
police commissioner and vice-president of the police board 
of this city. 

Q. You have been a second time appointed commissioner, 
have you not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. After serving how long ? A. About two years. 

Q. How long have you lived in this city ? A. 33 years. 

Q. What relation are you to Frank P. Blair, the repre¬ 
sentative of this State in the Senate at one time ? A. I am 
a son of his. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case, R. D. Lancas¬ 
ter ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know his general reputation in the community 
among those who know him ? A. Among politicians with 
whom he has a good deal to do, I believe it is bad. 



15 


Q. What do yon mean by a bad political reputation ; do 
you mean a bad reputation acquired by political trans¬ 
actions ? A. A bad reputation acquired in the course of 
political transactions ; yes, sir. 

Q. What is that statement of yours as regards the bad 
character of the plaintiff in political transactions, based on ? 
A. Well, it is based upon a great many things that I have 
heard and read. 

Q. What are they? A. I remember a number of years 
ago of reading a good deal of what was called—that is read¬ 
ing in the public press, a good deal of what was called the 
“ Dark Lantern Organization ” of which Mr. Lancaster was 
said to be the head. 

Q. Go on. A. That organization was charged with a 
great many nefarious transactions in politics, such as bleed¬ 
ing candidates, inducing men to believe that they could be 
elected by it to office, and afterwards deceiving and disap¬ 
pointing those men ; I know nothing of the facts in regard 
to that, but only state what I have read in the public press; 
and I have seen Lancaster’s name coupled in the public 
press very often with that of Mr. Edward Butler, of this 
city, a man of notoriously bad political character, and I 
have heard for a great many years a great many statements 
about him, most all tending to the conclusion that he was 
a man not to be trusted in any political matter. 


Louis A. Steber. 

My name is Louis A. Steber ; I reside in this city, and 
by profession am a lawyer. 

’ Q. Are you now living in this city % A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And have lived here how long \ A. Since 1847. 

Q. What official positions have you held ? A. I have 
been a member of the City Council. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you known him ? A. Probably fifteen 
years. 

Q. Do you know his general reputation in the community 
in which he lives ? A. I do. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. As a man engaged in politics 
his reputation is bad. 

Q. When you testify that the plaintiff has acquired a bad 
reputation, do you mean to say that it is based upon politi¬ 
cal transactions reputed to be dishonest % A. That is what 



16 


I understand his bad reputation to be based upon—transac¬ 
tions reputed to be dishonest, political transactions. 

Q. Political transactions reputed to be dishonest? A. 
Yes, sir. 


Charles Claffiin Allen. 

My name is Charles Claliin Allen, and by profession 
I am a lawyer. 

Q. How long have you lived in this city ? A. In or near 
the city all my life. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case ? A. I have 
met him. 

Q. Do you know what his reputation is in the community 
among those who know him? A. I don’t know his general 
reputation in business, but I know his general reputation as 
a politician. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. It is bad. 

Q. Then you mean that he has acquired a bad reputation 
based on political transactions ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long has the plaintiff had that reputation ? A. 
That I am unable to say ; I think ever since I have known 
his name at all—possibly 7 or 8 years, or 9, perhaps ; I am 
unable to fix any date ; I knew his name before I ever met 
him at all. 

Q. I believe you are a member of the Civil Service Reform 
Association ; a local official in it, are you not ? A. I am 
connected with the Civil Service Reform ; at present I have 
no position except as chairman of the Committee of Legis¬ 
lation and a member of the Executive Committee. 

Q. You served in the State Senate, did you not ? A. In 
the lower house one term—the House of Representatives of 
Missouri. 


Joshua Houston. 

My name is Joshua Houston, and I reside in this city. 

Q. How long have you resided in the City of St. Louis ? 
A. 47 years. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case personally ? A. 
Mr. Lancaster ? Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you ever a candidate for a democratic nomina¬ 
tion for any office ? A. Oh, I have received nominations 
from the democratic party. 




17 


Q. What were they ? A. I represented several wards in 
the City Council; I represented the Fourth Ward at one 
time, and once the Seventh Ward; 1 was elected twice in the 
Fourth Ward, and I ran after that in 1872 for the Legisla¬ 
ture. 

Q. Do you know what liis general reputation has been in 
the City of St. Louis for years past? A. His political rep¬ 
utation \ 

Q. Yes, sir. A. Yes, sir; it is bad. 

_ Q • Who did you ever hear say that Lancaster’s reputa¬ 
tion was bad % A. I will tell you, Judge Laughlin, that I 
have talked to divers men, and I never heard a man say yet 
that his reputation was good. 


Charles Gibson. 

My name is Charles Gibson, and I reside at 2040 Lafay¬ 
ette avenue, in this city. 

Q. How long have you lived in this city ? A. 51 years. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff, Richard D. Lancaster. A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Can you state that you know what his general reputa¬ 
tion has been for some years past in the community in which 
he lives % A. In what respect—do you mean politically % 

Q. His political or personal character, either or both % 
A. I think I can answer as to his political reputation. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. I think the sobriquet which is 
applied to him generally of “ Dark-Lantern Dick” about 
expresses his character as well as any phraseology I know. 

Q. Do you mean to say that his reputation is bad ? A. I 
think so, sir. 


Raphael F. Cohen. 

My name is Raphael P. Cohen, and I reside at 2516 
north 10th street, in this city. 

Q. How long have you resided there ? A. I have been re¬ 
siding in this city since 1856, at the same spot. 

Q. Do you know of an organization which is popularly 
known as the Dark-Lantern Organization at one time ? A. 
Yes, sir ; I was a member of it. 

3 G 




18 


Q. Please state to the Commissioner whether that was a 
secret organization or not. A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was a secret organization ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was there a pledge of secrecy taken by the members? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was there a pass-word ? A. I believe there was ; I 
won’t be sure of that. 

Q. Was there a door-keeper ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And there was a pledge by the members who joined it 
that they should not reveal its transactions—is that your 
testimony ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the purpose of this organization, as you 
understood it? A. Well, it was for political purposes. 

Q. What? A. Now comes the same question that was 
once put to me some years ago. I took an oath not to di¬ 
vulge anything that happened inside. 

Q. Do you say that you took an oath ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Swore ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q, What was the form of the oath? A. Well, that I 
couldn’t recollect. 

Q. Was it more than a promise that you would keep se¬ 
cret the proceedings in there? A. Well, when I reach up 
my two fingers I consider that binding. 

Q. Do you remember any members of the organization 
who were not from your ward ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who ? A. Lancaster. 

Q. I understand your to say that the members of that or¬ 
ganization took oath to work for and vote for the nominee of 
the organization, is that correct ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then if you were overpowered by numbers, or out¬ 
voted, you had to support the nominee? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How was that oath that you speak of ; did you say 
“so help me God?” A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And held up your hand ? Yes, sir. 



CHAPTER TWO. 


THE LETTER OF THE APPOINTEE TO THE TREASURY DEPART¬ 
MENT CONTAINING FALSE AND FRAUDULENT REPRESENTA¬ 
TIONS AS TO THE STANDING OF N. O. NELSON MANUFAC¬ 
TURING COMPANY. 


Office of the Custodian United 
States Custom House. 

St. Louis, Mo., October 14, 1886. 

Sir : I have the honor to forward herewith proposals for 
repairs to the heating apparatus in the building in my 
charge,' embraced in the report of J. C. Holmes, General 
Superintendent of Repairs, as requested by department let¬ 
ter (F) dated October 4, 1886, viz : 


Smith, Beggs & Rankin Machine Company, 

E. H. Moore, - 

Joseph F. Wangler, - 

N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company. 


- $4,300.00 

- 4.250.00 
4,580.00 

- 3,167.50 


In view of the very great disparity in the amount of the 
last and other three proposals, I beg leave to state that the 
N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company is engaged in the sale 
of machinery and supplies, engines, boilers, etc., and not in 
the work of repairing, or boiler work. A copy of the speci¬ 
fications for the repairs to the heating apparatus was ob¬ 
tained by one of the employees, and a proposal sent me for 
the work at the sum of $2,258.25. It being incomplete and 
indefinite it was returned for correction, and the inclosed 
proposal substituted at the srfm of $3,167.50. I am advised 
by my chief engineer, who is a practical mechanic of large 
experience, that the proposal is practically guess-work, and 
that the work cannot be properly done for the sum named; 
and I am also informed that the Nelson Manufacturing 
Company are not prepared to do the boiler work, but will 
have it done by other parties. As I have no confidence that 
the work will be properly done by said company, I recom¬ 
mend that this proposal be entirely ignored. As between the 
proposals of Smith, Beggs & Rankin Machine Company, and 
E. W. Moore, there being but $50 difference, in amount, I 
recommend the acceptance of the proposal of Smith, Beggs 



and Rankin Machine Company, on account of its reliability, 
high-standing and unlimited facilities for doing the work 
well and speedily, and also for the reason that E. W. Moore 
is not engaged in boiler work; and will be obliged to sublet 
that part of the work, and further, because work done by 
him heretofore has not been satisfactory. I feel assured that 
the best interests of the Government will be subserved by 
this course. As this work must be done at once, to prevent 
serious trouble and inconvenience, I respectfully request an 
answer by telegram. Very respectfully,* 

R. H. LANCASTER, Custodian. 

To the Secretary of the Treasury, Washington, I). C. 


THE DEPOSITION OF N. 0. NELSON SHOWING, AMONG OTHER 
INTERESTING THINGS, THAT HIS LOWEST BID, $2,258.25, 
WOULD HAVE PAID HIM A HANDSOME PROFIT. 

N. 0. Nelson, 

of lawful age, being produced, sworn and examined on the 
part of the defendant, deposeth and saith : 

Direct examination by John M. Glover, Esq. 

My name is N. O. Nelson, and I reside at 3880 Washing¬ 
ton avenue. 

Q, How long have you resided in this city % A. Fifteen 
years. 

Q. Ho you know the plaintiff in this case, Richard H. 
Lancaster ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He is now, I believe, surveyor of this port, is he not \ 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Hid you have any occasion to make any bid upon pub¬ 
lic work here at a recent date, and if so, what was it ? A. 
Yes, sir, I did; it was a bid for certain repairs to the steam 
heating apparatus in the Custom House, last October, I 
think—about October. 

Q, What is the name of your establishment ? A. The N. 
O. Nelson Manufacturing Company. 

Q. How long have you been in business ? A. Ten years. 
Q. Were you in business prior to the formation of the 
company ? A. Well, the corporation has only been formed 
lor four years. 



21 


Q. And the business going for ten years ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. During that time what business has your firm done for 
the Government of a kind similar to that for which this bid 
was made ? A. Well, they have done a large amount—sev¬ 
eral hundred thousand dollars worth, furnishing similar 
material for the Quartermaster’s department and the super¬ 
vising architect’s department and in steam heating ; I think 
one job—the Marine Hospital—amounted to about $9,000.00, 
and some other work which I have not now in mind. 

Q. Was that woik satisfactory to the Government so far 
as you know ? A. Entirely so ; we had no trouble whatever 
in settlement; it was not only approved but eminently sat¬ 
isfactory. 

Q. low long have you known the plaintiff personally ? 
A. About eight or ten years. 

Q. How far is your place of business from the Custom 
House ? A. Only a square. 

Q. What was your first bid on that work ? A' It was 
$2,200.00, I think, or close to it. 

Q. Was there a second bid made ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the second bid ? A. $8,300.00. 

Q. Was the contract finally awarded to you? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. On which bid? A. The $3,800.00 bid. 

Q. How came the second bid to be made : A. Personally 
I had nothing to do with the matter until the bid was ac¬ 
cepted and we had to give our bond, so I can only state the 
information as given me by our master mechanic. 

Q. I think you can state that ? 

[Counsel for plaintiff objects ; objection sustained.] 

Q. Who is your master mechanic ? A. William A. Reid. 

Q. Is he here in the city ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is the profit on that transaction ? A. Owing to 
the fact that the award was made late in the fall, and the 
fact that they could not shut down their boilers through 
the winter, it was stated to me by Lancaster that we could 
not finish the work until spring; we finished about half of 
it and the remainder is not yet finished, but the account of 
cost up to date and an itemized estimate of the remainder 
to be done, gives the cost at materially less than $2,000.00, 
leaving a profit of upwards of $1,300.00. 

Q. What then would have been the profit on the first bid ? 
A. There were some important items added which the Engi¬ 
neer of the Custom House called our attention to and stated 
that he wanted done, which was not explicitly mentioned in 


22 


this specification as first given ns ; the profit on the first bid 
would have been a first-rate one—a good, reasonable one. 

Q. As a business, proposition, if you had been privy to 
the making of the first bid, would you have done the work 
for the Government on that bid ? A. Certainly. 

Q. And made a profit? A. Certainly. 

Q. Who was it that represented the Government in the 
preliminary negotiations up to the signing of the contract, 
if you know ? A. I only know from Mr. Reid. 

Q. Mr. Reid represented you ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then you had no personal interviews concerning the 
matter with whatever person represented the Government 
before the contract was signed % A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you have personal interviews with Lancaster ? A. 
Only when it came to signing the bond, that’s all. 

Q. What transpired when you came to sign the bond— 
what occurred ? A. Well, there was nothing material; Mr. 
Lancaster made some objection to Mr. AYare and myself, 
who are the principal owners of the stock of the N. O. 
Nelson Manufacturing Company becoming the bondsmen, 
and I argued the point with him that as we had outside 
property we were competent bondsmen, and that point was 
satisfactorily settled, and we became the bondsmen. 

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge what representa¬ 
tions were made to induce the company to withdraw the 
first bid ? A. No, sir ; not of my own knowledge. 

Q. I believe you were elected a member of the City Coun¬ 
cil yesterday, or the day before, were you not ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. You had taken somewhat of an interest, as a business 
man, in politics in this city, have you not % A. Yes, sir ; 

I always had an interest as a citizen. 

Q. You do rather a large business, don’t you, in your es¬ 
tablishment ? A. We do something over $2,000,000 worth 
of business a year. 

Q. And you have known the plaintiff how long ? A. Ten 
or twelve years. 

Q. Do you know what his general reputation is in the 
community in which he lives ? A. Yes, sir ; I think so. 

Q. Is it good or bad ? A. In the political aspect of it, I 
believe it is bad. 

Q. Do you know what his reputation is for personal, as 
well as political, honesty ? A. I have no knowledge about 
that; no, sir. 

Or os s-Examination by Henry D. Laughlin , Esq. : 

Q. Your establishment had done this work for the Gov- 


23 


ernment for the Custom House in the first instance, had it 
not? A. No, sir ; we had furnished material simply. 

Q. When had this work been done in the Custom House 
previous to the time that these bids were taken ? A. Did 
you say when ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. I should think it was about three years 
ago, or between two and three years ago, when the Custom 
House was finished. 

Q. This bid was a bid for what ? A. The principal part 
of it consisted in taking down a large steam pipe, and put¬ 
ting gasket packing into the joints ; the joints had become 
leaky, by reason of the gaskets having been left somewhat 
loose, and thereby steam reaching them, and what we call 
burning them out. 

Q. Who did put the work in in the first instance ? A. I 
don’t actually know, but I know that Bartley, Robinson & 
Co., of Baltimore, had a large contract for steam-heating, 
and I think they did the principal part, or perhaps all of 
the work. 

Q. Did you furnish the material ? A. No, sir. 

Q. To whom did you furnish the material that had been 
put into the building ? A. To the government direct ; a 
straight government contract under Mr. Cameron’s super¬ 
vision. 

Q. In the first instance, when the building was fitted and 
furnished with these things, that Bartley, Robinson & Co., in 
the East,' had the contract for doing the work, you furnished 
the material directly to the government for the work ? A. 
No, sir ; they furnished their own material ; I don’t know 
whether any part of what we furnished there was for the 
steam heating or not ; whether any of that went into the 
steam-heating proper or not, I could not say—I doubt it ; 
the steam-heating was, I think, all let by contract. 

Q. Do you know who prepared the specification for this 
work, about which you were bidding, when you made the 
bid ? A. I don’t know but it came from Lancaster’s office. 

Q. Do you know from knowledge derived from such work, 
and your contact with Government officials, that the speci¬ 
fications are made by the department ? A. For repair work, 
I don’t suppose it was furnished from Washington, if that 
is what you mean by “the department?” 

Q. Yes? A. I didn’t suppose it was for repair work, 
though I should suppose that it would be specified from 
there upon the detailed recommendation of the local officer. 

Q. Do you know who furnished or prepared the specifica¬ 
tion in this instance ? A. I do not. 


24 


Q. Do you know the specification ? A. Yes, sir ; I have 
seen it. 

Q. Do you know whether, from the time the specification 
was first prepared until the contract was made, there was 
any change made in it ? A. In the specification % 

Q. Yes, sir. A. I think none. 

Q. Now, are you not mistaken about not seeing Lancaster 
previous to the time that you gave the bond % A. I am not; 
I am absolutely sure that I did not see him. 

Q. After your bid had been made—your $2,200.00 bid— 
did he not send for you, and did you not go to his office at 
the Custom House ? A. He did not send for me, nor did 
I go. 

Q. Did anybody from your establishment 1 A. Not to 
my knowledge they may have done that, but not to my 
knowledge ; quite possibly Mr. Reid did. 

Q. Did you withdraw the bid, or did Mr. Reid ? A. I 
didn’t, and I didn’t know of its being withdrawn. 

Q. Are you not mistaken about the fact that these addi¬ 
tional items were not in the specifications, but that, in the 
first bid, you had neglected to put them in the bid, and that 
they did not appear in the bid 3 A. No, sir ; I am not mis¬ 
taken ; I can state here certain items that are not expressed 
in the specification that were explained verbally as being 
wanted ; they are not in the specification, and they were 
wanted, and are furnished ; for one item, it was gaskets 
under the bands that went around to support the heavy 
pipe. 

Q. Have you got that first bid in your possession yet ? A. 
I think so. 

Q. You have the original paper 3 A. I think so ; I may 
not have the original paper—I don’t know about that; but 
I have a copy. 

Q. Have you got an impression copy of that in your let¬ 
ter book 3 A. I have no doubt but what we have. 

Q. Don’t you remember that, when the first bid was made, 
that it came to your knowledge that some of the statements 
had been omitted, and that the bid was withdrawn to be 
corrected 3 A. It did not come to my knowledge ; no, sir. 

Q. It was not true, then, that the bid was withdrawn by 
your firm to be corrected to conform with the specification 3 
A. I think not. 

Q. Are you sure of that 3 A. No, sir ; I am not, because 
I was not cognizant of the transaction in detail until it came 
to making the bond and signing the contract. 

Q. If I understand you, you had no personal knowledge 


25 


of this matter until you went to Lancaster’s office to sign 
the bond ? A. I had not, except so far as the record showed 
which I looked at. 

Q. When the first bid was made, was it required that a 
bond should be given ? A. No, sir ; I think not. Do you 
mean along with the bid ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. I think not; I have never known it to 
be required, and we are constantly bidding on Government 
supplies and work. 

Q. When the bid was first made, did you know that it 
w r as to be forwarded with other bids to Washington? A. 
Well, I would have known it; I would assume that, 

Q. You knew, as a matter of fact, that Lancaster had no 
authority to accept the bids, or make the contracts, did you 
not ? A. I know that he had, in point of fact, authority to 
accept by recommendation, but not technically to accept. 

Q. You knew that he had authority to recommend the 
acceptance of any particular bid to the authorities at Wash¬ 
ington ? A. Yes, sir ; and a little more than that. There 
is a good deal of the work and supplies that is furnished to 
the Government here that the local officers are authorized 
and do accept themselves. 

Q. Why is it ? A, The Quartermasters do ; the Engineer 
Department does ; the River Commissioner has done so ; 
and my impression is that Mr. Cameron did so for current 
supplies—I would not be sure about that, but I think so, 
So it would leave it uncertain in my mind whether this sort 
of a bid had to go on for approval or not. 

Q. Did you know, at the time you handed in your bid to 
the Surveyor, that it was to go to Washington for ac= 
ceptance or rejection ? A. I had no personal cognizance of 
the making of the bid, so I could not say what my knowl¬ 
edge or impression was, either at this moment, but if I had 
been asked, then I would have supposed that it had to go to 
Washington ; in the ordinary course of business, I probably 
would have thought nothing about it. 

Q. How long was it after the first bid was made until it 
was withdrawn ? A. I don’t know at all; the record will 
show. 

Q. How long was it before the second bid was made be¬ 
fore it was accepted? A. My impression is, from reading 
the record, it was about three weeks, 

Q. Now, do I understand you to say that, on your bid 
for $3,300.00 you had a profit of $1,300 on the work ? A. 
We shall have that much, yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know, at the time you made the bid, that there 
4g 


26 


was that much profit on the work % A. I didn’t make the 
bid. 

Q. At the time when your house did, did you know there 
was that much profit ? A. I could not answer that question, 
because I had no personal hand in making the bid, and hence 
I didn’t know anything about it; I take the case only as I 
find it, that we get $200.00 ; I have costs kept of all the 
work I do ; the work is not finished, but I can tell pretty 
close. 

Q. What was the cost of the work that was added in the 
proposition, that was embodied in the second bid % A. I 
don’t know, sir; I don’t know at all without getting the 
record, and making it up. 

Q. Did you know who was bidding against you for this 
work ? A. I did not; no, sir. 

Q. Did you know what the amounts of the other bids 
were at the time you changed your bids ? A. No, sir; that 
. is, I speak for myself; I didn’t know, nor do I think that 
our house knew. 

Q. Do you remember what it was that was added to the 
first bid ? A. I know, among other items, there was a large 
amount of gasket packing. 

Q. Do you remember what that would add to the cost of 
the bid ? A. No, sir ; I do not. 

Q. Can you approximate % A. Well, I know that there 
was one item of about nine hundred pounds, which would 
come to $350.00, or thereabouts ; that is the only one that 
occurs to me now. 

Q. Do you remember that the Government, when they au¬ 
thorized the letting of the contract to you, on your second 
bid, required the going of the bond from Washington ? A. 
No, sir ; I have no knowledge of that; the papers came to 
me from Lancaster—came by messenger ; I remember, and 
I immediately went over, and we then had a talk as to the 
bondsmen. 

Q. Did he inform you that he had been authorized to let 
the contract to you upon the giving of the bond ? A. I pre¬ 
sume he did ; I have a recollection that he stated that in 
terms. 

# Q- Was that the first intimation that you had of the con¬ 
dition of the bond being given, that you should have the 
work ? A. No. sir ; we have always given bond for similar 
contracts. 

Q. And you expected from the beginning to give bond in 
this case ? A. Yes, sir ; I would have expected to. 

Q. Lancaster first objected to your signing the bond, on 


27 


the ground that you were signing your own bond 3 A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. But you and he discussed it, and then the objection 
was waived and you signed the bond for your company 3 
A. Well, he sent me to Mr. Hatch—that was my second 
trip, I think, and he sent me to Hatch, and it seemed to 
have been settled between them then that Mr. Ware and 
myself were sufficient as bondsmen. 

Q. Was the question referred to Mr. Hatch to determine 
whether it was regular or legal for you to sign the bond for 
your company ? A. Well, I inferred as much; I was not 
referred to him, but when I came again, Lancaster said : 
“ Go to Mr. Hatch, and he will fix the bond up with you.” 

Q. Who was Hatch 3 A. Mr. Hatch, I understood to be 
Mr. Lancaster’s deputy. 

Q. Ho you know whether lie is a lawyer 3 A. I think he 
is ;.yes, sir. 

Q. And the bond was made for how much 3 A. For $2,- 
500.00, I believe. 

Q. And you personally signed it? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And it was approved 3 A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you doing all of this work yourself, or having part 
of it done 3 A. We are doing all of it ourselves, except 
$400.00 worth ; I believe that is all. 

Q. What is that 3 A. That is some flange work that is 
done by Rohan Bros.; I know their contract is $400.00, and 
I believe that is the* only thing outside of our own shop. 

Q. Is that the amount of the contract between you and 
Rohan 3 A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You know that of your own knowledge 3 A. Yes, sir; 
I believe so ; that: is my recollection of the exact figures. 

Q. If I understand you, all of the work required to be 
done by that specification can be done for $3,300.00, and 
leave a profit of $1,300.00 3 A. Yes, sir, a gross profit; of 
course, in one way of figuring, there are general expenses 
to come out of that; it would not be net profit. 

Q. What do you mean by gross and net profit 3 A. By 
gross profit I mean that which remains after taking out the 
cost of labor and material ; and by net profit, that which 
remains after taking out cost, labor, material, and proper 
charge for superintendence and general expense of conduct¬ 
ing the business. 

Q. What would be the net profit on the work called for 
by that specification 3 A. That would be impossible to say, 
because the estimate for superintendence and general ex¬ 
penses is a variable one ; it depends on so many contingen- 


28 


cies that we can never figure it to a certainty. However, 
the net profit would be as large a one as we ever aim at hav¬ 
ing in contract work. 

Q. Well, how much ? A. At least ten or fifteen per cent. 

Q. That would be the total cost of the material put into 
the work according to the specifications ? A. I don’t know 
separate cost of labor and material here. 

Q. From whom, then, did you get the cost of the work ? 
A. From my shop bookkeeper. 

Q. Then your testimony with reference to the gross profit 
on this work is based upon what he has told you, is it ? A. 
It is based upon my office records ; yes, sir. 

Q. It is not based upon your own knowledge as a practi¬ 
cal mechanic ? A. Ho, sir. 

Q. You are simply told by those in your employ that that 
much gross profit will be made out of this contract ? A. 
Hot at all. 

Q. How do you get it ? A. I have an itemized record on 
the record book, showing what goes into each job. 

Q. Who made that record ? A. My shop bookkeeper. 

Q. What are the names of these men that make up these 
reports ? A. Herman Stifel. 

Q. Is he all ? A. He is the one that has charge of the 
keeping of records on the cost on work. 

Q. He is the man that has made these records at your es¬ 
tablishment, of which you speak ? A.. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you knowledge outside of this matter, except 
what he has written upon these books, and what he has told 
you to be the profit? A. Ho, sir. 

Q. You are simply testifying what he has written, and 
what he has told you ? A. I don’t thinfe it is simply that, 
because all of our business is based on records, and this is 
part of our record. I know these facts as well as I know 
anything that pertains to my business, and I think that is 
more than hearsay. 

Q. It is simply a record ; by that you mean the books 
that you keep in your establishment ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. But, outside of what those books tell you, you know 
nothing yourself, do you ? A. 'H o, sir. 

Q. What has been the total cost of the material, as al¬ 
ready put in this work ? A. I don’t know the cost of the 
material and labor separately. 

Q. What is the material and labor together ? A. Up to 
date ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. I think it is a little more than half ; I 
think between $1,000.00 and $1,200.00. 


29 


Q. That is, the total cost of the work that has been done 
is between §1,000.00 and $1,200.00, np to this time? A. 
Yes, sir ; I think that is it. I had it before me, but-- 

Q. [Interrupting] Who gave it to you ? A. Mr. Stifel. 

Q. You got it from him when ? A. Well, I see that book 
continually, and I looked at it particularly yesterday, and 
asked him then for an estimated account of the remainder 
of the material and work to be furnished, but the record of 
what has been done is kept currently each day ; as anything 
is furnished it is put on that account. 

Q. So that what has been put into this work by the way 
of material and labor, you know only from what has been 
told you ? A. I only know by the record book. 

Q. I mean, what you read in your books, there, which is 
written by your clerks, as well as that which has been told 
you orally ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You know nothing beyond what has been told you in 
those two ways? A. I don’t know that such a man has 
worked at the job, does much during the day, and has used 
such and such material; I don’t know that of my own per¬ 
sonal knowledge. 

Q. Yor the quality of material ? A. Yo, sir. 

Q. When is the balance of the work to be completed ? A. 
From what Lancaster told me at the time I went to see him 
about the bond and signing the contract, and my personal 
information, it will be done as soon as the weather is warm 
enough to enable him to shut down the steam. 

Q. What did he tell you was the reason why you could 
not do the whole at once ? A. Because they could not, dur¬ 
ing the cold weather, shut down the steam at once to get at 
part of the work. He said that a part of it—perhaps half— 
we could do at once ; but the other half we could not do 
until spring, or warm weather. 

Q. Yes, but why was that? A. You don’t understand 
me. 

Q. I understand it, but we are taking this testimony for 
men who perhaps won’t understand it until they are told. 
A. Well, to shut down, is to stop the steam so that the 
steam pipes which carry the steam from the boiler to the 
pipe steam can be opened ; shuting down, technically, would 
imply that the furnaces were stopped. 

Q. You still don’t understand me ; you could not do the 
work, as I understand, because you would have to shut off 
the steam, and the steam was necessary to heat the offices 
and building? A. Yes, sir ; that is what I understood. 

Q. And until the weather was warm enough, so as not to 



30 


make it necessary to heat the court-rooms and public offices 
there, this work cannot be done ; in other words yon cannot 
shut down \ A. A certain part of it cannot be done until 
the steam can be shut off. 

Q» The remainder of the work % A. Yes, sir ; that is my 
understanding. 

Q. Do I understand you to say that, according to your 
records and records at your office, that half of the work has 
been done l ■ A. It is my recollection that about half has 
been done. 

Q. Does that include the whole contract—that is to say, 
one-half of the whole work required by the specifications % 
A. Yes, sir ; I may be inaccurate about that, but it is my 
impression. 

Q. Now, have you talked with Mr. John M. Glover about 
this matter ? A. I have. 

Q. When ? A. Last December. 

Q. Where % A. On a train going to New York. 

Q. Did you meet him on the train \ A. Yes, sir ; I met 
him on the train. 

Q. What was said between you and him ? A. He said 
that he had known that an adverse recommendation had 
been made by Mr. Lancaster as to letting to us the contract 
for repairing the steam heater in the Custom House ; that 
was the first I had heard of it. He then asked me how we 
were fixed for doing that sort of work, and what our facili¬ 
ties and experience in that kind of work was ; an account 
of which I gave him briefly. 

Q. Well, what else ? A. That is the substance of it all. 

Q. Did he say anything about Lancaster \ A. Not that 
I remember; no more than was incidental to this adverse 
recommendation. 

Q. What did he say that was incidental—that you con¬ 
sidered incidental ? A. That he had recommended that the 
bid of Smith, Beggs and Rankin Machinery Company be 
accepted in preference to ours, owing to the fact that they 
were familiar with that sort of work, and that we were not; 
that we were simply in the business of furnishing plumbing 
supplies, and not in the business of doing steam heating 
work. I informed him, in reply to that, that we were speci¬ 
ally in that kind of work; that we did perhaps half a mil¬ 
lion dollars worth of business a year in power and steam 
material and work, and were entirely familiar with it; that 
we had a highly paid manager, and a highly paid foreman, 
both of whom were experts in the business; that we had a 


31 


force of perhaps seventy-five men engaged in that shop work. 
Anything further about Lancaster I don’t recollect was said. 

Q. Did he say anything unfriendly about Lancaster ? A. 
Well, nothing that I remember in detail; my impression 
would be that he indicated an unfriendly feeling for Lan¬ 
caster. 

Q. What did he say to indicate that ? A. I cannot recol¬ 
lect anything. 

Q. The substance of it? A. Well, I should say that part 
of the substance was making this adverse recommendation 
as to us, but that would not really indicate his feeling. 

Q. He did express his feeling, did he not ? A. I have no 
recollection of it; I have no recollection of the talk run¬ 
ning further than this bid and our own business ; I know 
that he entered into the nature of our business considerably, 
as he seemed to have the impression that Lancaster had not 
only reported that we were not in this line of business, but 
that we were not much of a house anyway, and doubted our 
ability to carry out our contract. That is all I recollect of 
it. 

Q. Didn’t he express some pretty strong opinions about 
Lancaster to you? A. I don’t remember any, and I think 
it would have made no impression on my mind if he had, 
because I would have taken it for granted that he had this 
strong adverse impression of him. 

Q. But did he say anything to you to give expression to 
this strong adverse sentiment of feeling ? A. I recall noth¬ 
ing. 

Q. Do you recollect the substance of none? A. I do not. 

Q. At no time ? A. Ho, sir. 

Q. At any other time than on this trip, did you ever hear 
Glover speak of Lancaster ? A. I did not ; I have never 
met Mr. Glover more than three times in my life. 

Q. Where were the other two times ? A. One other time 
Mr. Glover came into my office to look for the address of a 
man in our directory, and I may have passed about ten 
words with him about the general election prospects. 

Q. When was that ? A. That was during the last fall 
campaign ; he stepped in to look at our directory. I don’t 
now think of any other time.that I met him until yesterday. 

Q. Was Lancaster’s name mentioned on this occasion ? 
A. Ho, sir ; not at all. 

Q. Do you remember the date of this trip that you made to 
Hew York ? A. Yes, sir ; it was on the 7th of December. 

Q. What year ? A. 1886. 

Q. At that time did you not have the contract for this 


32 


work ? A. Yes, sir ; and had done a good part of the work 
at that time. 

Q. And np to that time Mr. Glover had never said any¬ 
thing to you about this matter ? A. He had not. 

Q. Had he had no communications with you about it ? A. 
He had not. 

Q. Had he communicated with your house about it ? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. This trip, then, that you made in December, to New 
York, was the tirst interview that Mr. Griover had had, 
either with you or your house about this matter. A. Yes, 
sir, it was. 

Q. Did Mr. Glover at Washington do any work for you 
in connection with this matter? A. None, whatever. 

Q. Did you employ him to do it? A. Never, in any de¬ 
gree ; I never had a word with him about it. 

Q. Did any dispatches between you and him, or your 
house and him, while he was in Washington, pass? A. 
Never. 

Q. So the first interview that you had with Glover about 
this matter was after you had received the contract, and 
done a large part of the work ? A. Had done a part of the 
work—had fully started on the work, but not a large part. 

Q. Did you read any articles in the paper to the effect 
that Mr. Glover had prevented Smith, Beggs and Company 
from getting the contract ? 

[Counsel for defendant objects. Objection sustained.] 

Re-direct Examination by John M. Glover, Esq. 

Q. That meeting on the train was accidental, was it not ? 
A. Entirely so ; I met you as we went into breakfast the 
next morning after leaving here. 

Q. Did you know I was going on the same train ? A. No, 
sir ; I did not. 

Q. In using the term that I was unfriendly to Lancaster, 
did you mean anything further than that I expressed a bad 
opinion of him? A. No, sir. 

Q'. Did I not inform you, on that occasion I had become 
aware of the recommendation that your bid be ignored, and 
had prevented that action being taken, and secured rather 
the action of the department in accepting the lowest bidder ? 
A. No, sir ; I don’t remember that part of it. 

Q. I understand you to say that the profit gn the present 
bid would be $1,300.00 gross, about ? A. Yes, sir; it would 
be at least that. 


33 


Q. Then yon were asked wliat the nature of the profit 
would be. I don’t quite understand what you mean by 
gross profit ? A. The difference between the contract price, 
and the naked cost of the labor and material. Then there 
is the use of tools, and the cost of superintendence, and the 
cost of running our business at large quantities, that cannot 
be specifically fixed upon in one job. 

Q. Then, if I am correct, I understand you to mean about 
this : that what you call the net profit on that job would be 
about $1,300, but when you come to consider the general 
cost of running your business, part of the apparatus of 
which is devoted to the finishing of that job, and deduct 
that, that you then get your actual net ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. One hard to measure, exactly ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I believe you are the president of the N. O. Nelson 
Manufacturing Company, are you not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you in St. Louis during the time that these ne¬ 
gotiations were being carried on between your office, and the 
Custom House? A. I think not; I think I was in Europe 
when they first began. 

Q. Who is the person in the office who would be referred 
to as a superior, if a difficulty should arise between Reid 
and the opposite parties ? A. It might be Mr. Wells, if it 
was anything pertaining to mechanical matters; it would be 
Mr. Case, or myself, if it was anything in a general busi¬ 
ness way. 

Q. How would it be in regard to the question of price ? 
A. The question of price would be referred to Mr. Wells. 

Q. What is Mr. Wells’ position there? A. He is the 
manager of the machinery department, which includes steam 
heating and job work. 

Q. Who makes the estimate for the establishment for the 
purpose of making bids on this class of work ? A. Mr. 
Wells. 

Q. Now, in this interview in Washington, is it not true 
that I asked of you to make a statement of the facilities of 
your house for doing this kind of work—a brief statement, 
and I think, some statement in regard to the financial status 
of your establishment? A. Ho you mean on the train ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. Yes, sir; you did, and I did so. 

Q. And represented that the President had asked for it ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Hid you make it ? A. I did. 

Q. What did you do with it ? A. I gave it to you. 

Q. Now, will you please state again, a little more care¬ 
fully, or a little more in detail, if there are any further de- 
5g 


34 


tails, what your facilities for doing this sort of work are, 
and how long they have been such % A. AYell, we have fac¬ 
tory departments "that run altogether about two thousand 
men; we had then, about seventy men, I think, in the ma¬ 
chine shop department, which embraced the steam heating; 
we have a first-class shop, fully full of tools of the best sort; 
we have a first-class set of mechanics; we have a shop super¬ 
intendent, Mr. Reid, at a large salary, and we have a ma¬ 
chinery department manager, who is also entirely familiar 
with steam heating, and that class of construction, so that 
we have all the appliances for doing first-class work of that 
kind, and we have been in that business for, say, six or 
seven years. 

Q. How long have you been as well equipped as you were 
at the date of this bid in that apparatus and machinery % 
A. Since we rebuilt, after the fire, three years ago, and 
pretty nearly as well before that for several years. 

Q. Do you know of any establishment in town that has 
superior facilities to your establishment for doing that sort 
of work \ A. There are none quite equal to ours. 

Q. Now, are you able to state whether inquiries were made 
of you by the plaintiff, at any time, or of your establish¬ 
ment, so j:ar as you know, as to whether you had or had not 
these facilities, and what they were % A. I have heard of 
no such inquiries ; none were ever made to me. 

Q. Do you make your own gas pipe \ A. No, sir ; no gas 
pipe is made in this city; but we make in our own shop, a 
large part of the material used in that contract, which only 
a few shops in the town could make. 

Q. I understand you to say that the political reputation 
of the plaintiff is bad in the community ? A. It is ; that is 
my impression. 

Q. AYhat do you mean by political reputation ? A. I 
mean that which a man makes in connection with what he 
does in politics, as distinguished from that which he does 
in private affairs, or business. 

Q. You mean, then, a reputation growingoutof political 
transactions, rather than growing out of business transac¬ 
tions % A. Yes, sir ; I mean that. 

Re-cross Examination by Henry D. Laughlin, Esq. 

Q. It is a fact, is it not, that every man who goes actively 
into politics becomes more or less smirched ? A. I think it 
is the general opinion that they do. 

Q. YY>u don’t know of a man that has been active in pol¬ 
itics during the last ten years, in this city, who has not 


35 


suffered more or less abuse and scandal in connection with 
it, do you ? A. Oh, yes ; I do. Do you want me to tell 
you ? 

Q. Yes, sir ; tell me of any man who has been active in 
politics within the last ten years that has not had bad things 
said and written about him ? 

[Counsel for defendant objects ; objection sustained.] 

Q. You don’t believe all the harsh things you hear about 
a man in public, do you ? 

[Objected to by counsel for defendant as immaterial. Ob¬ 
jection sustained.] 

Q. Have you had any intimate relations with Lancaster 
in any way at any time ? A. Well, intimate in a way, and 
not intimate in another way. 

Q. In what way ? A. Well, he was, for instance, osten¬ 
sibly the manufacturer of a stop box used in this city, and 
for many years no other stop box was allowed to be used in 
the city ; and when that embargo was removed his brother 
continued to be inspector of plumbing and plumbing taps, 
and, owing to the influence of the power that he exercised 
in that position, the Lancaster Box was the preferred box, 
even after the Water Department had authorized the use of 
other boxes, and in that connection I met with Lancaster 
more or less, and knew of him in other ways. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this —*-day of 


THE DEPOSITION OF W. A. REID SHOWING, THAT THE AP¬ 
POINTEE’S AGENT ADVISED HIM TO RAISE HIS BID OF $2,258.- 
25 TO A HIGHER FIGURE, AND THEN RECOMMENDED THE 
ACCEPTANCE OF A BID, $1,132.50 HIGHER THAN THE BID AS 
RAISED. 

William A. Reid, 

of lawful age, being produced, sworn and examined on the 
part of the defendant, deposeth and sayeth : 

Direct Examination by John M. Glover, Esq. 

My name is Wm. A. Reid, and I reside at 1839 Madison 
street in this city. 

Q. What is your business f A. I am superintendent of 






36 


the machinery in steam heating department of N. 0. Nelson 
Manufacturing Co. 

Q. For how long have you occupied that position ? A. 
Five years in their place and previous to that I was with 
the Gould & Ostrander Company. 

Q. I believe you are now employed, or your establishment 
is now employed on the work of the heating apparatus of 
the United States Custom House ? A. We have a contract 
there that is unfinished. 

Q. Who made the first approximate bid for that work, if 
there was one ? A. I did ; that is I detailed the contents of 
the approximate bid that was made there for Mr. Davis, 
the chief engineer. 

Q. What was the amount of that bid first? A. It was 
something over $2,100.- 

Q. A fraction over ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was there a second bid made? A. Yes, sir; there 
was a second bid asked for. 

Q. What was that? A. That was some $3,100 and odd 
dollars, if I remember right. 

Q. Why was the second bid substituted for the first bid ? 
A. There were some few additions to be made there—pipe 
which was overlooked in the first—that his personal exam¬ 
ination was not made in the first bid. 

Q. Did you make the second bid ? A. Yes, sir ; I de¬ 
tailed the second bid. 

Q. What was the difference between the first and second 
bid, as to the work to be done and the materials to be ap¬ 
plied ? A. I will state further how I came to get into this 
last job ; the first that I came to know that they wanted any 

work done there was-[Question repeated] A. There was 

a small amount of difference in the labor. 

Q. Well, what amount ? A. I couldn’t say, exactly. 

Q. Approximate it as closely as you can. A. Probably 
a coirple of hundred dollars difference. 

Q. Why was the bid raised a thousand dollars if there was 
only a couple of hundred dollars difference in the work ? A. 
Well, Mr. Davis came over to my office and said, “I think 
probably you have made some mistake ; you had better 
overlook the work again and see if everything is in that 
bid.” 

Q. And then did you raise the bid a thousand dollars? 
A. I looked over some of the work and raised the bid to 
what it generally is. 

Q. Who is Davis ? A. I think he occupies the position 
of chief engineer there. 



37 


Q. He is in the steam house under the surveyor, is he not? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is the original bid ? A. The original bid being 
an approximation, it was simply a memorandum and is torn 
up. 

Q. It is not in existence then ? A. No, sir. 

Q. What facilities has your house for doing the kind of 
work for which you finally took the contract there ? A. 
We have first-class facilities for both steam work and ma¬ 
chinery work. 

Q. How long have you had such facilities \ A. For about 
a period of five years ; before that it was made by ma¬ 
chinery. 

Q. Hid you have business intercourse with the fed 
era! department here of that kind prior to that ; had you 
done work for the Government ? A. Yes, sir ; I put up all 
the pipe work of the Hydraulic Elevators there, amounting 
to something over $7,000 ; there are four elevators there— 
two passenger, on freight and one hoist. 

Q. When did you do that ? A. During the construction 
of the Custom House. 

Q. How long ago ? A. Well, I can say 5 years, as near 
as I can recollect. 

Q. Do you know the plaintiff in this case, personally ? 
A. No, sir; I n^ver met him personally. 

Q. Was Davis a new man there ? A. Yes, sir; he is a new 
man there. 

Q. What is his first name ? A. I think it is John, if I 
remember right. 

Q. A St. Louis man ? A. Yes’ sir; he is a Marine engi¬ 
neer. 

Q. Did you, in your business, happen to have become ac¬ 
quainted with the facilities for doing this work in other in¬ 
stitutions, and do you know how they compare with the N. 
0. Nelson Manufacturing Company in that regard ? A. Yes, 
sir. I had the steam contract for the Marine Hospital for the 
United States Government, amounting to some §7,400. 

Q. What other establishments are there that do the same 
kind of business here in this city ? A. Kupbere Brothers, 
the St. Louis Steam Heating Company which started re¬ 
cently—about this last year, and Branch, Crook & Co. 

Q. And Smith, Beegs and Rankin ? A. Not steam heat¬ 
ing. 

Q. They don’t do that? M. No, sir; they make exclu¬ 
sively machinery and foundry work—no boiler work. 


38 


Q. Do you know what their equipment is for this sort of 
work? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How does it compare with the N. 0. Nelson Manufac¬ 
turing Company ? A. It is less complete; they have no fa¬ 
cilities for pipe work at all; I can’t state positively, but I 
think that Kujjbere Brothers do their pipe work. 

Q. Do you do your own pipe work ? A. Yes, sir; we have 
machines for both cutting and fitting of pipes, up to 16 in¬ 
ches. 

Q. Can you state what the business done yearly is by the 
N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company in that line—is it 
very large or small ? A. It is very large; it is out of my de¬ 
partment, and I am unable to state the exact figures. 

Q. How many men do you employ? A. I will state, how¬ 
ever, that our last month’s business has been something over 
$200,000, including our interests in the different depart¬ 
ments. 

Q. How generally well-known in the community are the 
facilities of the N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company for 
doing this business—whether they are well-known or not in 
the business circles ? 

(Counsel for plaintiff objects. Objection over-ruled.) 

A. Yes, sir; the facilities are well-known. 

Q. Do they advertise much? A. Well, not as steam- 
heaters; they do advertise, but we are known through all of 
our customers as experts in that line, and we are also known 
in Washington. 

Q. And have been so known all that time? A. Yes, sir; 
for the last four years; I will state that I received a personal 
letter after the finishing of the Marine Hospital from Im 
spector Holmes, complimenting me on the job there; he said 
it was one job out of eight that they did’nt have to take 
something out. 

Q. What did you get from the Government for the Marine 
Hospital? A. Something over $7,000. 

Q. When was that done ? A. That was done about four 
years ago. 

Q. What length of time intervened between you sending 
your first bid in and the sending of the bid that was finally 
accepted? A. Well, I should say some thirty days, or 
something like that, as near as I can remember. I will state 
that that is counted the bid that the plumber got for the 
exhaust head; it was cut up in three different slices. 

Q. How long after you put in the first bid was it that you 
received this visit from Davis, ^)f which you have spoken l 
A. I didn’t understand the question. 


39 


Q. You have testified, as I understand it, that after put¬ 
ting in the first approximate bid you received a visit from 
Davis, in which he advised you to revise it—to look it over ? 
A. Yes, sir ; I want to state that the first bid that pertained 
to this job, which I didn’t know the second time, was a bid 
asked by the plumber, Mr. Burns ; he got a bid from me for 
an exhaust head and two 6-inch valves and pipe to be put in 
there on a Sunday, which amounted to a hundred and some 
odd dollars, approximately. I presume that he wanted to 
make his report at head-quarters about the probable cost, 
and Davis came to me to get an approximate bid on the pipe 
work pertaining to what we are now speaking of, and I gave 
him one. 

Q. About $2,100? A: Yes, sir. 

Q. You say that sometime after that Davis returned to 
you and you had this conversation about looking over the 
bid again ? A. About 30 days after that Davis came back 
with this approximate bid and asked me if I had included 
the exhaust head and the 6-inch valves and the 12-inch T— 

Q. (Interrupting). I am asking you simply a question of 
time. How long was it after you had this interview with 
Davis, of which you have spoken, until ^ou put in your 
second bid—the bid that was accepted ? A. Well, it was 
put in the next day, I think, after Davis called with the 
approximate bid we got the other ready and put it in the 
next day. 

Cross-Examination by Henry D. Laughlin, Esq.: 

Q. Did you superintendent the bidding for the work ? 
A. Yes, sir ; the details of it, and all special figuring for 
special work that is not on the catalogue—discount sheet. 

Q. The first bid that you made was simply an approxi¬ 
mate ? A. Yes, sir ; made for the benefit of Mr. Davis, who 
is a new man there, and somewhat inexperienced, I guess. 

Q. Made by you simply to indicate to him what the 
amount of work called for in the bid would amount to ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That, too, if I understand you, was not a regular bid 
for the purpose of a contract at all, but simply for his in¬ 
formation ? A. Well, it would have been, if it had been 
accepted on the face of the specification that was then made 
out. 

Q. Did you bid on the whole specification, or did you bid 
only on portions of the work when you made the $2,100 bid % 
A. Well, that was the mission of Davis to see me—whether 
I had the bid on the whole business, or whether I had the 


40 


bid embracing the plumber’s approximate figure in the 
whole, which I had not. 

Q. Your first bid, then, was not a bid for all the work em¬ 
braced in the specification? A. No, sir ; not all. 

Q. Davis came back to see whether you meant to make it 
apply to all the work ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And asked you if you intended to do it, or if you had 
made a mistake in that respect? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you looked over and found that it did not cover 
all the work ? A. It covered all that was in the first speci¬ 
fication, but not what the plumber had called for in the first 
—that is, 30 days before that. 

Q. There was but one specification, was there ? A. That 
was all, but there was one verbal one by Burns, 30 days 
previous to that, 

Q, Was your first proposition based simply upon the 
verbal statement of Burns, as to what was wanted ? A. As 
to what he wanted, yes, sir ; we figured it out right then ; 
I didn’t make any visit over there. 

Q. The first bid, then, that you made, which you say was 
an approximation, was not upon the written specification, 
but a verbal explanation of Burns, as to what was wanted ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then it was not until after you got the written speci¬ 
fication that you made the $3,100 bid? A. We made the 
first bid by Davis’ specification. 

Q. By the written or verbal specification ? A. By the 
written one, the $2,100 one. 

Q. Before you made the first bid, did you make an ap¬ 
proximate estimate? A. We made an approximate esti¬ 
mate on a part, namely, two six-inch valves, and six-inch 
pipe connection, to connect the batteries of the high pres¬ 
sure boilers together. 

Q. Then you made three offers, or three bids ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. The first was for a portion of the work, at the instance 
of Burns ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Based upon Burns’ verbal statement as to what was 
wanted ! A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The second was a written proposal, based upon written 
specification, but for only a part of the call of the specifica¬ 
tions ? A. Wei], it was figured out at the face of the speci- 
cation, that $2,100 bid was. 

Q. Then I suppose when Davis came back, and told you 
to increase your bid a thousand dollars, he winked at you, 
did he ? A. No, sir. 


41 


Q. There was a margin there for yon of a thousand dol¬ 
lars ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you mean to say that the first proposition based on 
the written specification all the work called for by the spe¬ 
cification, or that it comprehended only a part? A. It com¬ 
prehended a part. There was some more there to be done, 
which was really overlooked in making out the specifica¬ 
tion. 

Q. Overlooked by* whom? A. Overlooked by Davis, in 
making mention of it on the specification. 

Q. Do you mean to say that, between the time that he 
brought you the first specification—I mean when you made 
your first proposition, and made the second,—he had changed 
that paper ? A. No, sir ; he had not changed it, but he 
showed me other pipes which required more joint to be bent. 

Q. He showed you more than you had bid on? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. He showed you a difference between the specification 
and your first bid? A. He showed more actual work to do 
than there was in the first specification. 

Q. He showed you, from the specification, more work to 
be done, and more materials to be finished, than your bid 
called for, didn’t he ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Your first bid then covered all that that specification 
called for ? A. Yes; the $2,100 bid, except—well, yes, the 
first bid called for all ; that is right. 

Q. The first bid for $2,100 covered all that was called for 
by the specification ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You have got that bid in writing, have you not ? A. 
Well, we did have it; it was made to Davis. 

Q. But you have got a copy of it, have you not ? A. I 
don’t know whether we have or not. 

Q. Don’t you keep copies of all bids that you make ? A. 
Not all approximate bids. 

Q. This was not an approximate bid, though ; this was a 
bid for the contract ? A. If I remember right it was made 
to Davis. 

Q. Didn’t you say that you had made it for the purpose 
of making the contract, based upon the written specifica¬ 
tion ? A. Well, approximately, they might have held us 
to it. 

Q. I didn't ask you what they might have done, but don’t 
you keep copies of all such bids ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you not got, then, a copy of that bid ? A. I 
couldn’t say. 

6g 


42 


Q. Well, you have it, unless you have destroyed it, have 
you not ? A. I guess we have. 

Q. You have not destroyed it, to your knowledge, have 
you ? A. No, sir. 

Q. You have had no motive in destroying it? A. No, 
sir ; I don’t have charge of that department. 

Q. So far as you know, the copy of that paper that you 
keep, in all such cases, must be in the possession of the N. 
0. Nelson Manufacturing Company ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And that the bid comprehended all the work to be 
done in the specification—that is true, is it not ? A. Well, 
it comprehended it all under the heading, but the work to 
be done was not all embraced in it. 

Q. Do you mean to say that the specification compre¬ 
hended it, or that you did not comprehend it ? A. I mean 
to say that I bid exactly according to the specification on 
that first bid, and I also state that Davis came to me with 
the bid, and said : “ You have left out something here, and 
you had better look it over, and see if there is not something 
that you have missed,” and I looked it over, and I saw that 
there was about $200 difference between my bidding and the 
construction of the specification, as he gave it to me, and he 
told me something about his approximate bid that he had 
made in Washington, and he said : u You had better raise 
that bid.” 

Q. What did he say to you about his approximate bid ? 
A. He didn’t say anything to me one way or the other, ex¬ 
cept what I have stated. 

Q. Didn’t you state, a moment ago, that he told you about 
his approximate bid at Washington ? A. I don’t think that 
he made any approximate bid, but I know that they have 
to, under the Government rules ; they have got to make an 
approximate estimate at Washington before they can get 
the requisition to do their work, and he said that he had 
made that, but I don’t know what it was. 

Q. And he told you to raise the bid ? A. He told me that 
he thought we were way low on it. 

Q. Just what did he tell you ? A. I don’t remember. 

Q. Didn’t you think it was very singular that he was look¬ 
ing after your interest there? A. I thought that it was 
singular, but I thought that he was trying to protect him¬ 
self— 

Q. (Interrupting.) When he asked you to raise the bid, 
you thought he was trying to protect himself in some way ? 
A. Probably so. 

Q. You thought that at the time ? A. Yes, sir. 



43 


Q. Did you ask him liow much it would be necessary to 
raise it ? A. No, sir ; I did not. 

Q. You were willing to protect him, though, were you ? 
A. We made the bids- 

Q. (interrupting) You were willing to protect him ? A. 
No, sir; he was a stranger to me. 

Q. You didn’t raise the bid for the purpose of protecting 
him? A. No, sir. 

Q. You were not trying to get advantage of the Govern¬ 
ment, in order to protect him ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Nothing of that kind ever entered into it? A. No, 
sir. 

Q. Did you ask him how much you ought to raise it when 
he suggested the propriety of raising it? A. No, sir. 

Q. You just jumped at it, and raised it a thousand dol¬ 
lars ? A. I think it was $800, or something like that. 

Q. Did you raise it $800 ? A. I think, something like 
that. 

Q. Didn’t you raise it a thousand dollars ! A. No, sir ; 
I did not. 

Q. Did it figure in just $200 ? A. I couldn’t say, exactly. 

Q. Well, about $200 ? A. Somewhere near $200. 

Q. That is to say, about $200 difference between your bid, 
and the construction of the specification? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you jumped it $800 ? A. I took it at $800. 

Q. You jumped the $800 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Made it $800 bigger ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Didn’t you agree with Davis to divide that with him ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Didn’t he ask you to divide it with him ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Didn’t he intimate to you that, if there was only the 

contract difference-A. (Interrupting). No, sir ; I will 

state here that these pipes there below the ground can’t be 
figured on accurately in breaking the joints ; probably some 
of them are raised joints, and probably some of them are 
lead joints ; these joints weigh from 1,200 to 1,800 and 2,- 
000 pounds apiece ; they have got to be taken out, and there 
are 18 bolts to each section; a master mechanic in going there 
and looking at those pipes below ground, can have a differ¬ 
ent opinion from another one and can vary $700 in regard to 
the amount of labor in putting them in. My way of figur¬ 
ing that was quite less on the labor, because I used my 
mechanical skill, as well as machinery in the solution of 
the problem. The way I proposed to do that, and did do 
some of it before—some defective pipes that were left out 
were put in afterwards by me—it was by machinery ; I put 




44 


them in by machinery ; by weight blocks and hoist, and 
took it ont section by section, done it all by machinery. 
That way would fetch the cost lower than any other way. 

Q. When there was only a difference of $200 between the 
contract as you had bid on it, and the contract as Davis ex¬ 
plained it to you, what was your motive in increasing the 
bid *800 ?. A. The motive was that I might encounter some 
of these cast-iron joints there and break a* section, which 
would probably cost me lots of money. 

Q. Why was it that you jumped at four times $200 ? A. 
He said that he had put in several of those joints, and had 
had some difficulty in putting them in, and that he thought 
that my bid was low, and that we had better look out for 
the extra cost in those joints. 

Q. Did you ask him what difficulty there would be ? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Was that warning that he gave you that you might 
have more difficulty than you anticipated, the only cause to 
make you jump the bid ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That was the only thing that caused you to do that ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you meet with any such difficulty when you came 
to do it ? A. It is all done except that part. 

Q. This was work that was all covered up, was it not ? A. It 
is in brick channels, covered over with iron plates. 

• Q. And the work that yon were bidding on was covered 
up, and the work after you completed it would be covered 
up ? A. It would be covered up with iron plates. 

Q. Can it be seen without removing these covers? A. 
No, sir ; not without removing them. 

Q. Then the work that you were bidding on was all con¬ 
cealed from you ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And when completed it will be concealed from the 
public gaze? A. Yes, sir ; nevertheless, I know what is in 
there because I worked on them when it was put in ; I put 
in some parts of it ; there were defective pieces left out, 
which was afterwards finished up by our house. 

Q. But the work that you put in was not defective ? A. 
We have not discovered any defect; we got our money from 
the Government. 

Q. I didn’t'ask you that, The work that you originally 
put in was not defective, was it ? A. No, sir. 

Q. The work that Bartley did was 

defective ? A. As far as the joints are concerned, it seems so. 

Q. That is what caused this necessity for repair ? A. Yes, 
sir. 


45 


Q. It was the defective work which the other fellows had 
put in, not you % A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who were you working for when you put in a portion 
of this work % A. I was with Gould & Ostrander, and near 
that time Gould & Ostrander was bought out by the N. O. 
Nelson Mf g. Co. 

Q. The N. 0. Nelson Mfg. Co. did not put in any part of 
this original work, did they ? A. I think that was done by 
Gould & Ostrander, or about the time of the change. 

Q. About the time of the change of Gould & Nelson to 
the N. 0. Nelson Manufacturing Co.4 A. Yes, sir ; I was 
their superintendent. 

Q. Did you ask Davis about how much it would cost to do 
this work, that he called your attention to ? A. No, I did 
not ? I don’t remember that I did. 

Q. You made no inquiry about that at all? A, No, sir. 

Q. I suppose this bid, when you made it, was a guess, 
then ? A. It is so with all bidders. 

Q. What do you mean by that \ A. They might en¬ 
counter raised joints and break a section with rough usage; 
on the other hand, if they had skillful men and chain pulley 
blocks, they will get out all right without breaking any of 
them. 

Q. But the bidding was a mere guess, was it not % A. 
No, sir ; it was a bid on the mechanical basis. 

Q. Didn’t you say a moment ago that it was a guess % A. 
As far as the joints are concerned, and breaking them, it 
is so. 

Q. This $800—part of it was a guess, was it not % A. 
Well, I guess it was, as far as encountering these joints in 
that way is concerned. 

Q. Did you tell Davis that if the award was made on the 
bid that you would never do the work ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Never told him that ? A. No, sir. 

Q. You never told Davis that if the award was made on 
the first bid that you would not do the work % A. I don’t 
remember of having any conversation of that kind with 
him. 

Q. Didn’t Davis go and ask you if you intended to stand 
by the bid ? A. The first bid ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. He came and asked me—the mission of 
his trip was to ask me if I had Burns’ detail in that bid. 

Q. Didn’t he ask you if you intended to stand by the bid 
if it was awarded you ? A. Not if the plumber’s bid was 
included in it. 

Q. Didn’t he ask you if you intended to stand by the bid 


46 


and do the work ? A. The first question lie asked me was, 
if I remember right, if I embraced Bnrns’ material in that 
bid ; my answer was no ; that if he intended me to do that 
work, that I wouldn’t stand by the bid and do the work. 

Q. After you told him that, he asked you to make another 
bid ? A. He told me to go over and look over the ground, 
and see about making another bid. 

Q. Hid you make the first bid before you had looked the 
ground over ? A. I made the bid by his specification. 

Q. You had not been over to look at the place at all; be¬ 
fore you made the first bid, had you been there to look at 
it ? A. Before I made the first bid ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. I went over there to see him ; he had 
sent for me. 

Q. Then you had looked the ground over before you had 
made the first bid ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When he told you that you had better go and look the 
ground over, why didn’t you tell him that you had already 
done that 3 A. He explained to me about banding some 
other joints that were not included in that specification, 
which he would like to have done ; that was some 8 inch, 
and as low as 6 inch ; for instance, his specification called 
for 120| wire gum gaskets, and we really put in 220. 

Q. Then you were not putting the work in according to 
the specification ? A. We are ; and more, too. 

Q. Was this increase that he told you that he wanted, the 
cause of you raising your bid ? A. Yes, sir; up to the 
amount of $200. 

Q. Where did you get in the other $600 ? A. By Havis 
speaking about the trouble that we might encounter. 

Q. That is to say, the plumbers work and the possibility 
of your meeting with more difficulty than you anticipated, 
is all that caused you to raise your bid to $800 ? A. Yes, 
sir; as per his explanation. 

Q. Hid’nt you raise it a thousand dollars? A. ]STo, sir. 

Q. What is the amount of the first bid ? A. If I remem¬ 
ber, it was $2,100 or $2,000; I have not looked it over since 
last fall. 

Q. What was the amount of the last bid ? A. $8,100. 

Q. Then the difference is a thousand dollars, is it not? 
A. Well, the two hundred dollars figured in his last explan¬ 
ation, the intrinsic difference in value being about $200. 

Q. Then you jumped the bid $800, to anticipate these pos¬ 
sible difficulties? A. Yes, sir; as explained by Havis. 

Q. It was not because your first bid failed to comprehend 


47 


all the work required that you jumped this bid.a thousand 
dollars, was it? A. I don’t seem to catch your question. 

Q. Do you mean that you don’t understand the question? 
A. Yes, sir; we did’nt jump the bid a thousand dollars. 

Q. You increased it a thousand dollars, did you not? A. 
From the first ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. If I remember right it was in that neigh¬ 
borhood. 

Q. By jumping it, I mean increasing it. The reason for 
doing that was not because your first bid failed to include 
all the work required by the specification, was it? 

(Counsel for defendant objects. Objection sustained.) 

Q. How much profit was there in this contract ? A. Well, 
we are not through with it; we have come out very hand¬ 
somely in it, so far. 

Q. How far ? A. I can’t say, really ; my business is to 
push the work, and see that it is done properly ; I should 
say that we are about two-thirds done with it now. 

Q. What has been the cost of the work so far ? A. That 
is out of my line, too ; I couldn’t tell you. 

v 

Be-direct Examination by John M. Gtlovee, Esq. 

1 Q. Have you the first specification that Davis made, on 
wthich you had the $2,100 ? A. I have not got them here ; 
they are at the store ; but I think I can pretty nearly read 
them over in my own mind. 

Q. I want to know whether the papers are at the store or 
not, so far as you know ? A. Yes, sir, I think so. 

Q. Do I understand you to say that there was nothing 
said in this specification about burns’ work at all ? A. JSTo, 
sir ; there was nothing said about Burns, that is, in the 
specification. 

Q. I mean in the specification. Yow you have been asked 
what the explanation was, as far as you know of Davis. I 
will ask you if it never occurred to you that he might want 
you to bid in the-air, in order to give some one else a chance ? 
A. It did not, then, sir ; and I don’t say that it does now ; 
he has got many important points from me since he has been 
there. 

Q. The purport of the interview with Davis, when he came 
back, was to ask you whether your bid on the written spec¬ 
ification included the Burns job that was not included in 
the specification ? A. Yes, sir. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this -day of 







CHAPTER THREE. 


STATEMENT OF DATES WHICH APPEAR FROM THE ABSTRACT 
OF TITLE (BELOW), AND WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO AN 
UNDERSTANDING OF THE EVIDENCE TO FOLLOW : 
LANCASTER BECAME SURETY OF JNO. BUSBY, AUGUST 24TH, 
1874. SUIT WAS ENTERED ON THE BOND, OCTOBER 15TH, 
1875. JUDGMENT FOR $25,000 AND COSTS WAS RENDERED 
19tii may, 1876. u. s. marshall sold iiis property 
UNDER EXECUTION, JUNE 21ST, 1877. JUDGMENT COM¬ 
PROMISED for $500, june 27tii, 1878. property re¬ 
turned TO HIM IN APRIL, 1888. 

THE ABSTRACT OF TITLE SHOWING THE FRAUDULENT DERE¬ 
LICTIONS AND RETURN OF HIS PROPERTY. 


St. Louis, Mo., May 27, 1886. 

Gentlemen : The following is a correct statement and 
abstract of deeds of all real estate owned by Richard D. Lan¬ 
caster, on the 24th day of August, 1874, as shown by the 
records of the office of the Recorder of Deeds of the city of 
St. Louis, showing how and when he acquired the same, and 
all conveyances made in relation to said real estate to the 
present time. 

The Sterling and Webster Abstract Co. 

By B.F. Webster, 

President. 

Attest Thos. B. Reynolds, 

Secretary. 

[SEAL.] 

BLOCK 29. 


22 feet 6 inches on west line of First street by 150 feet to 
alley south by Locust street. 


William J. Lewis, Rebecca, his wife, 
Benjamin N. Lewis, Jr., and Anna 
H., his wife, 

To 

R. D. Lancaster and Thos. O’Reilly. 


Warranty July 20, 1874. 
Book 5 r 0, page 470. 
Consid. $65,200.00. 

Same lot. 


R. D. Lancaster and Thos. O’Reilly 
To 

Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance 
Company (as trustees). 


Deed of Trust, July 21, 1874. 
Book 507, page 69. 

Same lot. 





50 


To secure one note for $40,000.00 at three years, and 6 in¬ 
terest notes for $1,600.00 each. Satisfied on the margin by 
cestui que trust. 


R. D. Lancaster, by U. S. 

To 

Thomas McDermott. 


Marshal 


Marshal’s Deed, June 21, 1877. 
Consid. $5.00. 

Book 573, page 291. 

Und. -J same lot. 


Thos. McDermott (single) 
To 

Thos. O’Reilly. 


Quit Claim August 31, 1877. 
Subject to 507-69. 

Book 576, page 240. 

Consid. $1 00. 

Und. same lot. 


R. D. Lancaster 

To 

Thos. O’Reilly. 


Quit Claim, September 20,1877. 
Consid. $1 00, 

Book 581, page 132. 

Und. ■} same lot. 


BLOCK 208. 


13 feet 6 inches on the east line of Center street, by 70 
feet north of Patrick Conway. 


John Cairns and wife, Almyra, by 
trustee, 

To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, Annie K., 
To ' 

James Laughlin. 


James Laughlin, 

To 

R. D. Lancaster’s Trustee. 


Deed of Trustee, June 28, 1873. 
Consid. $3,675.00. 

Book 380, page 3. 

Same property. 

Warranty, March 1, 1875. 
Consid. $2,000.00. 

Book 516, page 253. 

Same property. 

Deed of Trust, March 1, 1875. 
Book 515, page 365. 

Same property. 


To secure note $1,300.00 at 8 months, ten per cent, from 
date. Satisfied on the margin by cestui que trust. 

R. D. LANCASTER. [seal. 

BLOCK 208. 


40 feet on the west line of Thirteenth Street by 70 feet, 
beginning 205 feet north of Clark avenue. 


John Cairns and Almyra J., his wife, 
by Trustee, 

To 

R. D. Lancaster. 

R. D. Lancaster and Annie K., his wife, 
To 

Ed. Butler. 

Ed. Butler, 

To 

R. D. Lancaster’s Trustees. 


Trustee’s Deed, June 25,1873. 
Consid. $5,675.00. 

Book 480, page 3. 

Same property. 

| Warranty Deed, December 15, 1875. 
i Consid. $3,600.00. 

Book 541, page 520. 

Deed of Trust, December 15, 1875. 
Book 543, page 479. 

Same property. 










51 


To secure part purchase money—3 notes, each for $1,000.00, 
payable in 6, 12, and 18 months even date. 

Satisfied on margin by assignee cestui que'trust. 

J. H. TIERNAN. [seal.] 


Ed. Butler aud Ellen, his wife, 
To 


R D. Lancaster. 


Warranty April 4, 1883. 

Consid. $10 00. 

Book 701, page 31. 

Subject to Deed of Trust, December 
15, 1875—3 notes of even date for 
$1,000, and taxes of 1883. 

Same property. 


BLOCK 251. 

50 feet on the east line of Eighth street, by 127 feet 6 
inches to alley, beginning 60 feet, more or less, north of 
Carr street. 


Thomas Ames and Elizabeth, his wife, 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


R. D. Lancaster, 

To 

A. W. Mead’s trustee. 


Warranty except Deed of Trust 232- 
258, November 28,1863. 

Consid. $3,500.00. 

Book 279, page 460. 

Same property. 

Deed of Trust, June 11, 1874. 

Book 503, page 23. 

Same property. 


To secure note for $11,877.20, even date, 10 per cent, after 
maturity. Satisfied on the margin of the record by cestui 
que trust , April 25, 1876. 

A. W. MEAD. [seal.] 


R. D. Lancaster and Annie K., his wife, 
To 

James Ennis’ trustees. 


Deed of Trust, April 24, 1876. 
Book 541, page 432. 

Same property. 


To secure 7 notes—one for $15,000.00 at 3 years, and 6 
interest notes of $135.00 each, one due every six months. 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, by trustee, 
To 

James Tiernan. 


Foreclosure of 'Deed of Trust, 541, 
page 432, May 14, 1877. 

Book 567, page 513. 

Consid. $9,800.00 in all. 


For 50 feet on the east line of Eighth street, $3,200.00. 
Same property. 


James Tiernan, 

To 

L. Freeman’s trustees. 


Deed of Trust, May 14, 1877. 
Recorded Book 573, page 134. 
Same property. 









52 


To secure one note for $9,500.00 at 3 years, and 6 interest 
notes for $427.50 each. Satisfied on the margin by assignee 
of cestui que trust , April 13, 1883. 

JOSEPH H. TIERNAN. [seal.] 


R. D. Lancaster by Marshal 
To 

James Tiernan. 


James Tiernan, (single) 
To 

Richard D. Lancaster. 


Marshal’s deed, June 21, 1877. 
Consid $20.00 for all. 

Book 574, page 325. 

Same property. 

I Warranty, April 4, 1883. 

I Consid. $10.00. 

I Book 692, page 540. 


BLOCK 251. 


20 feet on the East line of Eighth street, by depth of 127 
feet 6 inches to alley, beginning 110 feet, more or less, North 
of Carr street. 


Joseph H. Tiernan, (single) 
To 

Richard D. Lancaster. 


Quit Claim, March 1, 1886. 
Consid. $10.00. 

Book 789, page 2. 

Same property. 


BLOCK 527. 

13 feet 3 inches on North line of Lucas avenue, by 144 feet 
East line, beginning 188 feet East of Sixteenth street. 


James C. Adams and Clara, his wife, 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


Delicit Adams, by Trustee, 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


R. D. Lancaster and Annie, his wife, 
To 

Citizens Savings Bank’s Trustees, 
Joseph O’Neil and Henry Yonder 
Au, Jr. 


Warranty, March 19, 1863. 

Consid. $900.00. 

Book 273, page 268. 

Undivided, £ same property. 

January 4, 1864. 

Consid. $1,863.00. 

Book 284, page 122. 

Sale under 271, page 236. 

Deed of trust, December 22, 1875. 
Book 531, page 452. 

Same property. 


To secure $2,349.78 at 6 months, 8 per cent, from date. 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, by trustee 
To 

Joseph H. Tiernan. 


May 14, 1877. 
Consid. $2,400.00. 
Book 571, page 253. 
Same property. 

Sale under above. 









53 


R. D. Lancaster, bv U. S. Marshal, 
to 

Joseph H. Tiernan. 


June 21, 1877. 
Consid. $5.00. 

Book 571, page 422. 
Same property. 


Joseph II. Tiernan, (single) 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


Warranty, April 9, 1888. 
Consid. $10.00. 

Book 702, page 54. 

Same property. 


BLOCK 528. 


East half lot 2, Block 1, of H. M. Dean Addition, 13 feet 
6 inches on north line of Lucas avenue, by depth of 70 feet. 


James Dockery and Christina, his wife, 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


Warranty, January 1, 1863. 
Consid. $1,500 00. 

Book 278, page 204. 

Same property. 


R. D. Lancaster, 

To 

A. W. Mead’s, Trustee. 


Deed of trust, June 11, 1874. 
Book 508, page 23, 

Same property. 


To secure note for $11,879.20 even date, 10 per cent, from 
maturity. Satisfied on margin by cestui que trust , April 
25, 1876. 

A. W. MEAD, [seal.] 


R. D. Lancaster, Annie K., his wife, 
To 

James Ennis’ Trustees, (Joseph O’Neil 
and D. D. Thayer.) 


Deed of Trust, April 24, 1876. 
Book 541, page 432. 

Same property. 


To secure note for $15,000.00 at 3 years, and 6 interest 
notes for $135.00 each, one due every six months. 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, by Trustees, 
To 

James Tiernan. 


Foreclosure under deed of trust. 
541, page 432, May 14th, 1877. 
Book 567, page 513. 

Same property. 


Consid. $1,800.00 for this property. 


James Tiernan, 

To 

L. Freeman’s Trustee. 


Deed of Trust, May 14, 1877- 
Book 573, page 134. 

Same property. 


To secure one principal note for $9,500.00 at 3 years, and 
6 interest notes for $427.50, one due every six months. Sat¬ 
isfied on the margin by assignee of cestui que trust , April 
13, 1883. 


JOSEPH H. TIE BN AN. [seal.] 









54 


R. D. Lancaster, by Marshal, 
To 


James Tiernan. 


James Teirnan, (single) 
To 


R. D. Lancaster. 


Marshal’s Deed, June 21, 1877. 
Consid. $20.00 for all property levied 
on. 

Book 574, page 325. 

Same property. 

Warranty, April 4, 1883. 

Consid. $10.00. 

Book 692, page 540. 

Same property. 


BLOCK 577. 


Lot 6, in west half of block, 27 feet, 6 inches on the east 
line of Eleventh street, by 125 feet to alley. 


Patrick Caulkin and wife, Alice, 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 

R. D. Lancaster, 

To 

A. W. Mead’s Trustee. 


Warranty, November 4, 1867. 
Consid. $5,000.00. 

Book 353, page 21. 

Same property. 

Deed of Trust, June 11, 1874. 
Book 503, page 23. 

Same property. 


To secure note for $11,879.20 even date, 10 per cent, from 
maturity. Satisfied on margin by cestui que trust , April 
25, 1876. A. W. MEAD, [seal.] 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, Annie K., 
To 

James Ennis’ Trustee, (Joseph O’Neil 
and D. D. Thayer.) 


Deed of Trust, April 24, 1876. 
Book 541, page 432. 

Same property. 


To secure note for $15,000.00 at three years, and 6 interest 
notes for $135.00 each, one due every six months. 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, by trustee. 
To 


James Tiernan. 


Foreclosure under Deed of Trust, 541> 
page 432, May 14, 1877. 

Book 567, page 513. 

Same property. 


Consideration $8,200.00 for this property. 


James Tiernan, 

To 

L. Freeman’s trustee. 


Deed of Trust, May 14, 1877. 
Book 573, page 134. 

Same property. 


To secure one principal note for $9,500.00 at 3 years, and 
6 interest notes for $427.50, one due every six months. 
Satisfied on the margin by assignee of cestui que trust, April 
13, 1883. JOSEPH H. TIERNAN. [seal.] 


R. D. Lancaster, by Marshal, 
To 


James Tiernan. 


Marshal’s Deed, June 21, 1877. 
Consider. $20.00 for all property levied 
on. 

Book 574, page 325. 

Same property. 


James Tiernan, (single) 
to 


R. D. Lancaster. 


Warranty, April 4, 1883. 
Consider. $i0.00. 

Book 692, page 540. 
Same property. 











55 


CITY BLOCK, 972. 


Lot IB and west half of 14; Block 7, Stoddard Addition, 
47 feet 6 inches, on the south line of Thomas street, by depth 
to alley, bounded west by Elliott avenue. 


John Walsh, Eliza Walsh, his wife, 
and James K. Hardy, by Alex. P. 
Garesche, trustee, 

To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


Deed by Trustee, April 6, 1868. 
Consider. $650.00. 

Book 259, page 62. 

Under 387, page 413, 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, Annie K., 
To 

James Ennis’ trustees, Jos. O’Neil and 
D. D. Thayer. 


Deed of Trust, April 24, 1876. 
Book 541, page 432. 

Same property. 


To secure note for $15,000.00 at 3 years, and 6 interest 
notes for $135.00 each, one due every six months. 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, by trustee, 
To 


James Tiernan. 


Foreclosuie under Deed of Trust 541, 
page 432, May 14, 1877. 

Book 567, page 513. 

Same property. 


Consideration $1,600.00 for this property. 


James Tierman 

To 

L. Freeman’s trustee. • 


Deed of Trust, May 14, 1877. 
Book 573, page 134. 

Same property. 


To secure 1 principal note for $9,500.00 at 3 years, 6 in¬ 
terest notes for $427.50, one due every six months. Satisfied 
on the margin by assignee of cestui que trust , April 13, 1883. 

JOSEPH H. TIEBNAJST. [seal.] 


R. D. Lancaster, by Marshal, 
To 


James Tiernan. 


James Tiernan, (single) 
To 


R. D. Lancaster. 


Marshall’s Deed, June 21, 1877. 
Consid. $20,00 for all property levied 
on. 

Book 574, page 325. 

Same property. 

Warranty, April 4, 1883. 

Consid. $10.00 
Book 692, page 540. 

Same property. 


Lots 11 to 18. Block I, Wm. H. Murray’s addition. 


CITY BLOCK, 1229. 

208 feet in west line of Second street by 130 feet to alley, 
bounded South by Angelica street. 








56 


William T. Mason and wife, Louisa, 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


R. D. Lancaster and wife, Annie K. 
To 

George P. Prendergast. 

George P. Prendergast, 

To 

R. D. Lancaster’s Trustee. 


Quit Claim, January 19, 1865. 
Consid. $500.00 
Book 298, page 153. 

Same property. 

Warranty, December 15, 1875. 
Consid $4,000.00. 

Book 550, page 69. 

Deed of Trust, December 15, 1875. 
Book 549, page 204. 

Same property. 


To secure 3 notes of even date, $1,000 each at 6, 12 and 18 
months, 6 per cent, from date. Satisfied on the margin by 
cestui que trust , December 13, 1879. 


R. D. LANCASTER. [Seal.] 


George P. Prendergast and wife, Mary. 
To 

Joseph H. Tiernan. 


Joseph H. Tiernan, (single). 

To 

Oscar Reid. 


Oscar Reid, 

To 

Joseph H. Tiernan’s Trustee. 


Warranty, except Deed of Trust 549, 
page 204, January 10, 1878 
Consid. $1,000.00. 

Book 587, page 99. 

Same property. 

Warranty, except Sewer-bill and Tax 
of 1880. December 12, 1879. 

Consid. $2,000.00. 

Book 625, page 100. 

Same property. 

Deed of Trust, December 12, 1879. 
Book 618, page 487, 


To secure one note for $746.65 at 1 year, and one for 
$706.65 at 2 years, 10 per cent, from maturity. Satisfied on 
the margin by cestui que trust , December 14, 1881. 

JOSEPH H. TIERNAN. [seal.] 

I 

LOT IN BLOCK, 1986. 

40 feet on Compton avenue, by 142 feet, 6 inches to alley, 
beginning 327 feet, 6 inches South of St. Charles Road. 


William Henry and wife, Mary, 
To 

R. D. Lancaster. 


R. D. Lancaster, 

To 

B. J. Van Court’s trustee. 


Warranty, March 27, 1868. 
Consid. $10,000.00. 

Book 357, page 394. 

Same property. 

I Deed of Trust, May 17, 1876. 

Book 545, page 400. 

I Same property. 


To secure notes of even date, for $3,150.00, (no time) one 
for $150.00, interest. Satisfied on the margin by assignee 
cestui que trust , April 13, 1883. 

J. H. TIERNAN. [seal] 









57 


R D. Lancaster by U. S. Marshal 
To 

P. D. Keating. 

P. D. Keating, 

To 

R X). Lancaster. 


LOT No. 


Marshal’s Deed, June 27, 1877. 
Consid. $68.00. 

Book 569, page 520. 

Quit Claim, April 10, 1888. 
Consid. $70.00. 

Book 695, page 470. 


2, BLOCK 552. 


25 feet on the North ]ine of Carr street, by depth to alley, 
bounded East by Seventeenth street. 

Joseph H. Tiernan, (single) Special Warranty, March 1, 1886. 

To Consid. $10.00. 

R D. Lancaster. Book 789, page 2. 

Same lot. 

All of said property is situated in the City of St. Louis. 


AFFIDAVIT OF LANCASTER ON WHICH COMPROMISE WAS BASED. 

St. Louis, Mo., August 30, 1876. 

Hon. Lot M. Morrill, 

Secretary of the Treasury . 

Sir : — The petition of Richard D. Lancaster, a citizen of 
the city of St. Louis, Mo., respectfully represents that at 
the May Term, A. D. 1876, of the District Court of the 
United States, for the Eastern District of Missouri, in the 
suit of the United States vs. John Busby , et al., No. 2750, 
of the Docket of said Court, upon a distiller’s bond of John 
Busby in the penal sum of thirty-five thousand dollars— 
petitioner was adjudged to be liable to the United States, 
together with said Busby’s administrators, and Patrick P. 
Manion, Michael I. Mehan, John Bellville, John McMahon, 
and Jeremiah Ryan, the other securities on said bonds, in 
the sum of twenty-five thousand dollars. 

And your petitioner further represents that said bond was 
signed by him under the following circumstance, to wit: 
1st. That on or about the 24th day of August, 1874, at the 
city of St. Louis, aforesaid, said Busby, who was at that 
time County Judge of St. Louis County and an influential 
and respected citizen of said city, whose name was not con¬ 
nected with any frauds upon the Government, came to the 
petitioner and requested him to accompany him to the office 
of Constatine Maguire, then collector of internal revenue 
8g 



58 


for the United States for the first collection district of Mis¬ 
souri (now serving out a term of imprisonment in St. Louis 
County Jail for complicity in the so-called k£ Whisky 
Frauds,”) for the purpose of signing his bond as a distiller; 
that accordingly your petitioner accompanied him to the 
office of said Maguire, when the said bond sued on was pro¬ 
duced, and your petitioner was requested by said Busby to 
sign the same, as one of his sureties ; that petitioner seeing 
the amount of the penalty in the bond expressed his un¬ 
willingness to sign it, but said Maguire took him aside and 
requested him to sign, saying that it was a mere formality 
and that he could not run any risk ; that upon being assured 
that there were to be upon the bond with him five other 
sureties, petitioner signed the same and qualified for the 
amount of $12,000. 2d. And petitioner further shows that 

the judgment upon said bond assessed the damages at 
double the actual damages, the actual damage being only, 
in the sum of $12,500. 

Now, your petitioner respectfully shows that the time he 
signed said bond he was worth the amount of $12,000, but 
that he was at that time largely engaged in the iron busi¬ 
ness, which, owing to the great depression in that line of 
business, has been unprofitable and ruinous to the fortune 
of the petitioner ; that he has lost not only his capital, but 
is heavily indebted by reason of these reverses, and that at 
present he is unable to pay his debts, and for the purpose 
of maintaining his wife and children he is now endeavoring 
to carry on business as a real estate agent. 

Plaintiff further says that he is wholly unable to pay said 
judgment, and that with it hanging over him he cannot 
make an honest livelihood for his wife and family. Peti¬ 
tioner further says that he was not connected in any "way with 
the said whiskey frauds, and that he was never "connected 
in business with said Busby in any way. 

Wherefore, in consideration of the premises, petitioner 
prays that he may be discharged and released from the 
judgment in favor of the United States against him upon 
said bond, and your petitioner will ever pray, &c. 

BICHARD D. LANCASTER, 
Petitioner. 

State of Missouri, ) 

County of St. Louis. \ ss ' 

Mr. Richard D. Lancaster, being duly sworn, on his oath, 
says : That he is the petitioner in the annexed petition, and 
that all the statements contained in the annexed petition 


59 


are true. And this affidavit further says that in the latter 
part of August, 1874, John Busby, then judge of the bounty 
Court of St. Louis County, and a personal friend of this 
affiant, requested this affiant to go on his bond, which he 
gave as a distiller ; said Busby stating that Constantine 
Maguire, then collector of internal revenue in this district, 
had charge of the whole matter. Affiant being well ac¬ 
quainted with said Maguire, and trusting him as a personal 
friend, went to see him, and inquired of him as to the nature 
and character of the bond, whether there was any danger 
of risk in going upon it, and was informed by him that there 
was no danger so long as he was collector ; also that he 
(Maguire) had two Government officers stationed day and 
night at the distillery ; that Busby could not take out a 
gallon of whiskey, unless the tax was paid, without a per¬ 
mit from him or the officer in charge ; that the permission 
of the United States officers was necessary in order even to 
enable Busby to get it, so that it was impossible that any¬ 
thing could be taken from the warehouse except accord¬ 
ing to law. 

Upon this statement of Maguire, and reposing trust upon 
him, especially as he said that if there was any loss he 
would be willing to pay it himself, and as he had always 
borne a high character as an official, this affiant went on 
said bond. 

In October, 1874, and as soon as affiant heard the first talk 
about the whiskey ring, he went to said Maguire #nd told 
him that affiant had heard talk about the whiskey ring, and 
to the effect that the Government was being defrauded and 
that he (affiant) did not feel safe, and wanted to get off the 
bond ; also, that the affiant had heard that he (said Maguire) 
was connected with these frauds, which said Maguire de¬ 
nied. Affiant persisted and demanded of said Maguire that 
he (affiant) should be taken off the bond, and said Maguire 
then promised to make said Busby give a new bond, which 
he did about the 1st of September, 1874. 

Affiant says further that the statements in said petition in 
regard'to his pecuniary losses, are correct as there set forth. 
Affiant further says that he was in no way connected in 
business with said' Busby, nor was he at any time until, as 
above stated, informed as to any whiskey frauds or attempts 
to defraud the Government ; that as soon as he obtained 
information he came forward, as above stated, and demanded 
his release. Affiant was not on any bond of any other dis¬ 
tiller or rectifier, nor was he in any way connected with the 
whiskey business or anybody engaged in it. 

* RICHARD D. LANCASTER. 


60 


State of Missouri, ) 

County of St. Louis. ) 

Be it remembered that on this, the first day of September, 
A. D. 1876, before me, Theodore Hunt, a Notary Public in and 
for St. Louis County aforesaid, came Richard D. Lancaster, 
who was personally known to me to be the same person whose 
name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument of writing, 
and he, being by me duly sworn, upon his oath, says : That 
the facts therein stated are true, to the best of his knowledge 
and belief. 

In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and 
official seal the day and year last above written. 

[seal.] * THEODORE HUNT. 


THE DAMAGING DEPOSITION OF LANCASTER’S PARTNER,— 

LANCASTER PRACTICING A FRAUD ON THE GOVERNMENT ON 

THE ONE HAND AND ON HIS CUSTOMERS WITH THE OTHER.- 

LANCASTER ABSTRACTED $25,000 OF THE MONEY OF CUS¬ 
TOMERS WITHOUT TIIEIR KNOWLEDGE. 

Joseph H. Tiernan, of lawful age, being produced, sworn 
and examined, testifies as follows: 

Direct Examination by Mr. Glover. 

Q. You are a member, as I understand, of the firm of Lan¬ 
caster & Tiernan? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. They are engaged in a general real estate business, are 
they not? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do they place money for customers—do they loan 
money for customers ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you been engaged in that business. A. 
Oh, more than twenty years. 

Q. Then you were engaged in the business in 1874 ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you a partner ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you the only partner of Lancaster ? A. Yes, sir. 
Q. You keep partnership books, I suppose ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. General books of accounts ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What were the books—not what was in them, but what 
do you call them ? A. The cash book, the ledger and tenant 
register—a book for memoranda about tenants. 

Q. The cash book, a ledger and a tenant register ? A. 
Yes, sir. 



61 


Q. Any other books ? A. Well, those are the three prin¬ 
cipal books in onr business; of course we have a bank book. 

Q. A bank book showing the bank deposits ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you what they call a blotter ? A. Yes, sir ; a 
book that we use when people want repairs done; we put 
that down in the blotter, and that is all we put in there. 

Q. You have a check book, of course? A. Yes, sir; a 
check book; that’s what I meant by a bank book. 

Q. I thought you meant a bank pass-book ? A. We have 
got a bank pass-book, and a check-book, both. 

Q. You keep a semi-system of accounts by the stubs, do 
you not ? A. Yes, sir ; we keep the stubs. 

Q. So as to be a sort of memorandum to what use the 
check was devoted ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you any other books besides those five ? A. No, 
sir ; there is no other cash book. 

Q. Who keeps the books ? A. Mr. Lancaster’s son has 
. been keeping them for the last year or two. 

Q. What is his name ? A. Richard J. Lancaster. 

Q. Who kept them before him ? A. I did. 

Q. And preceding that, as far back as the year 1874 ? 
A. I did. 

Q. During all of that time ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are those books in existence from 1874 to the present 
time ? A. I think they are. 

Q. Where are they kept ? In our office. 

Q. They are there now, so far as you know then ? A. So 
far as I know they are there. 

Q. Now, I would like to ask you what your interest in the 
firm is, if you have no objection to answering that question ? 
A. In regard to the division of the profits ? 

Q. Well, I don’t care about that so much ; are you on a 
salary? A. No, sir. 

Q. You have an interest in the profits ? A. I am interested 
in the profits only. 

Q. If you have" no objection state what your interest is ? 
A. Oh, t have no objection. We divide the profits ; I take 
half and Lancaster takes half. 

Q. You divide them equally? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is there a capital belonging to the establishment, or do 
you have to have a capital in the real estate business ? A. 
As far as owning anything jointly I will state that w r e own 
nothing in common excej>t safe, desk and office furniture. 

Q. That is about what the assets of the firm consists of ; 
that this is usually the case with real estate firms, is it not ? 
A. I thing so. Mr. Lancaster has his real estate and I have 
mine. 


02 


Q. That is personal ownership ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you become Lancaster’s partner, about what 
year. A. I think in 1871. 

Q. Did yon at that time put in any capital beyond the 
necessary equipments for doing a real estate business—an 
office and all that—not you personally, but I mean was there 
any capital of the firm at that time? A. Oh, I had some 
money to my credit there and I just let it stand. 

Q. But it belonged to you, did it not? A. Yes, sir; it 
belonged to me. 

Q. It was simply held for your account? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then there was no capital in the ordinary sense of that 
term? A. No, sir. 

Q. And there never is in the real estate business ? A. 
There never is in the real estate business, as I understand 
it. 

Q. Mr. Tiernan, what is the general nature of the con¬ 
tents of the Tenant Register , not what is in the book, but 
what accounts do you keep in that book ? A. The name of 
the landlord with what property belongs to the landlord. 

[Counsel for plaintiff’s objects as immaterial; objection 
overruled.] 

Q. What else? A. The name of the tenant that occupies 
certain property, whatever property it may be. 

Q, Is that all ? A. The number of the house, the street, 
the city block, how the rent is paid—whether monthly or 
quarterly or half yearly, the amount paid per month or 
quarter as the case may be, and when paid to ; when a ten¬ 
ant paid his rent it is marked in there that he has paid up 
to a certain time. 

Q. So as to know whether he is in arrears and how much ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is there anything else in that ? A. Way up at the 
other end there is a little place for any sort of a remark about 
a lease or monthly tenant, and things of that sort. 

Q. How many such registers have you had since the year 
1874—I mean successive books, when one was used up ? A. 
That is a book that lasts a long while, Mr. Glover ; proba¬ 
bly not more than two. 

Q. Well, I presume you have the old one in your posses¬ 
sion, if there is one that has been completely filled, is there 
not? A. Yes, sir; all the old books are filed up there in 
that office, as far as I know. 

Q. Now, what does the cash book show? A. The cash 
book shows when tenants come in and pay ; how much cash 
is received. 


63 


Q. The amounts received from the tenants ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is the first book of entry ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And from that you write up the other books ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Is that all it shows ? A. It shows what we pay out, 
too, for repairs, and when people come and draw money. 

Q- Then your collection business and disbursements for 
repairs, and other costs, appear in full in the first instance 
in the cash-book as a memorandum ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is the next book to which you transfer those en¬ 
tries \ A. That is posted direct from the cash-book to the 
ledger. 

Q. Now, what does the ledger show ? A. It shows all of 
our landlords’ accounts. 

Q. It shows, in the first place, who your landlords are, 
does it not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. W hat else does it show ? A. The amount of money 
that we collect from each of them, that comes through that 
cash-book. 

Q. Does it also show payments to them on account ? A. 
Yes. sir. 

Q. Have you a receipt-book ? A. Yes, sir ; whenever any 
landlord comes for money we give him whatever he asks for 
and take a receipt from him. 

Q. In a separate book ? A. Yes, sir ; in a separate book. 

Q. In a bound book ? A. Yes, sir. , 

Q. Does anything else appear in the ledger—you said that 
you had the landlord’s name there ? A. Yes, sir ; and the 
amount that we receive from them and for them, and the 
amount paid out ; that is all. 

Q. Then each landlord’s account appears there in shape 
under his name, if the account is fully posted ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. And do you charge against him the repairs of the 
property l A. Yes, sir. 

Q. So you can tell at once if he has a balance to his 
credit ? A. Yes, sir ; at any minute. 

Q. Yow, where does your profit and loss account, and 
where does your semi-annual settlements appear, if you have 
semi-annual settlements % A. We have semi-annual settle¬ 
ments ; I make out on general paper the list of all of our 
landlords, showing how much they owe us and how much 
we owe them, and how much overdraft there is, and that we 
figure up in our profits. 

Q. Don’t you enter those settlements anywhere, in any 
part of your books ? A. I have not of late years ; I did 
some years ago, and I don’t know where they are now. 


64 


Q. Up to what time did you keep them in the books, and 
what was the reason of the change of method in that re¬ 
gard ? A. Well it was a long and tedious thing, and I 
didn’t see any necessity for it. 

Q. Up to what time ? A. I don’t know the year. 

Q. Well, approximately ? A. I think it was probably 
1878, or perhaps 1879. 

Q. You think you kept them in permanent state up to 
that time? A. Yes, sir ; or 1880, or along there. 

Q. In what book were those semi-annual statements kept ? 
A. I don’t know wdiat you would call it—a blotter, I be¬ 
lieve. 

Q. Was it a separate book ? A. It was a separate book. 

Q. Where is that book ? A. That is there, I expect ; I 
have not had occasion to look for it. 

Q. You don’t know of any reason why they should not be 
there—at your office ? A. No, sir ; I know of no reason 
why it should not be along with the balance of them. 

Q. This semi-annual statement showed the profit and loss ? 
A. It showed how much we made and lost. 

Q. Was it a semi-annual statement? A. Yes, sir; the 
first of July and January. 

Q. Where did your individual accounts appear—that of 
yourself and partner ? A. In this ledger. 

Q. That would show the division of the profits, would it 
not ? A. Yes, sir ; that shows the division of profits. 

Q. That would show charges against either party, would 
it not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. For instance, if, out of profits, a sum was paid on ac¬ 
count of yourself, that would appear in the ledger, would 
it ? A. That ledger shows just every dollar I have drawn 
out for my personal expenses and every other expense ; it 
shows all the items. 

Q. For instance, if you draw to-day $50 and $100 to-mor¬ 
row, and $5 the third day, there would be three separate 
items, as I understand ? A. Yes, sir ; I pay my bills— 
clothes and every thing else, and charge it right to that ac¬ 
count. 

Q. If you drew $50 on three separate times there would be 
three separate items for $50, would there not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you keep a separate account of rents collected for 
each member of the firm—you both had real estate, didn’t 
you ? A. Yes, sir ; we did. 

Q. Was there a separate account kept for each one of the 
members ? A. Yes, sir ; a separate account. I credit my¬ 
self with all the rents that come in for my property, and 


65 


charge myself with all that I pay out for my personal ex¬ 
penses, investments or anything else. 

Q. Did you keep an account of rents received for you by 
the firm, and rent received by the plaintiff by the firm in the 
same account, in which your individual account appears, or 
was a separate book or separate account in which you figured 
as a landlord, and in which Lancaster figured as a landlord ? 
A. I think it figures in the same books. 

Q. Your name would appear as a landlord, would it not ? 
A. It would be “ Lancaster & Tiernan in account with J. H. 
Tiernan.” 

Q. Wouldn’t your name appear in the Tenant Register ? 
A. Yes, sir ; showing my real estate. 

Q. And his name would appear in the Tenant Register ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Showing his real estate 2 A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wouldn’t the account of Lancaster, for instance, ap¬ 
pear under the head of R. D. Lancaster, as a landlord, in 
the Tenant Register? A. Yes, sir, showing his real es¬ 
tate. 

Q. Showing how much he received in rents and how much 
was disposed of on his own account ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And in the division of profits your account was kept 
in a ledger, showing the receipts and disbursement by each ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. As landlord your account appeared like any other land¬ 
lord, and under the same system \ A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember of some property owned by Lan¬ 
caster in block 29, on Main and Locust? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did the firm, at any time, collect the rents for that 
property ? A. Mr. Lancaster owned an undivided half in¬ 
terest in it, and Dr. O’Reilly owned the other half. 

Q. Did the firm collect the rents for that property at any 
time ? A. Yes, sir ; the firm collected the rents. 

Q. Up to what time? A. I could not give you the dates 
that we collected these rents. 

Q. Can you approximate it? A. I can look (producing 
memorandum). 

Q. What is that, that you have in your hand ? A. It is 
a memorandum here of some dates. 

Q. Made by you ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Made from the books ? A. Some of the dates were 
made from memory and some from the books. I thought 
there was a memorandum of the date that this property was 
sold, but there is not; you have got an abstract there ; we 
collected it up to the time it was sold. 


66 


Q. It is represented by the abstract as having been sold by 
the United States Marshal to Thomas McDermott on the 21st 
of June, 1877 ? A. Well, I guess we collected the rents then, 
up to that date. 

Q. Did you collect them after that ? A. Oh, well, O’Reilly 
took his property from us along about that time ; I forget 
now whether it w T as before or after. 

Q. To what agency did he change ? A. To Thomas S. 
Noonan, we had charge of his property to 1877 or 1878. 

Q. Have you any knowledge of the circumstances attend¬ 
ing that conveyance of McDermott to O’Reilly ? A. I have 
not. 

Q. Were you present at the sale ? A. When McDermott 
bought ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. I think I was ; that’s my recollection. 

Q. Who is McDermott ? A. A bricklayer and contractor. 

Q. What relation had he to your firm ? A. Well, he used 
to work for us. 

Q. Were you there when he bought ? A. That’s my re¬ 
collection. 

Q. Didn’t McDermott remain a patron of the firm after 
ouying that property ? A. Yes, sir ; he is working for us 
yet. 

Q. No ; I don’t mean that—you say he is working for you 
now ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. But I mean when he acquired Lancaster 1 s title at the 
marshal’s sale ; of course, then he had a title to the property, 
and somebody had to collect the rents—did you collect them 
for him ? A. Yes, sir ; we collected them for McDermott. 

Q. Now, up to the time that McDermott conveyed to 
O’Reilly, did you collect the rents for him all of that time? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you draw the deed from McDermott to O’Reilly ? 
A. I did not. 

Q. Did you see it drawn ; have you any recollection of 
it? A. No, sir. 

Q. You don’t remember ? A. No, sir. 

Q. How did McDermott come to buy the property ? A. 
He bought it at the marshal sale. 

Q. Did you know that he was going to buy it in advance? 
A. Did I know it ? 

Q. Yes, sir. A. Yes ; I advised him to buy it. 

Q. Why did you advise him to buy it ? A. To hold it 
for me. 

Q. Did he hold it for you ? A. He did. 

Q. When you say that you continued to collect the rents 


67 


for McDermott, you don’t mean that do you ? A. We col¬ 
lected them in his name. 

Q. His name was on the books? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. But you got the rents ? A. He was to hold it until 
such time and do with it as I directed. 

Q, Did he give you a written agreement to that effect ? 
A. No, sir ; it was not necessary. 

Q„ Who got the rents then ? A. I held them. 

Q. Why did you hold them ? A. Until we got other 
matters straightened out. 

Q. What other matters % A. Well, that came in just the 
same as all the other property of Lancaster’s. 

Q. How is that Mr. Tiernan ? A. I insisted at the time 
on having these deeds of trust which you will refer to 
in a little while I suppose, and all the property under my 
controll until such time ; well, Lancaster had lost so much 
money in the Big Muddy Iron Company that the customers, 
whose money was in our hands, were in danger, and I in¬ 
sisted on getting control of his property to see them through, 
as I was his partner in the concern ; I insisted on holding 
that ; I wasn’t going to pay it all up. 

Q. You wanted to be protected ? A. I wanted to be pro¬ 
tected. 

Q. Against the debts of the firm ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Which you were not liable for ? A. I was liable; yes r 
sir. Of course I was liable for the debts of the firm, but I 
wasn’t liable for the Big Muddy Iron Company’s debts ; nor 
I wasn’t liable for any judgment on the Busby bond. 

Q. Wasn‘t the agreement between you and Lancaster that 
you should not be liable for debts of his ? A. I wasn’t 
liable for his debts. 

Q. 'Was it not the agreement between you and him that 
you were not liable for any debts of the firm ? A. No, sir ; 
nor never has been. 

Q. You say that you held the rents ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Pending a settlement with him? A. Pending a set¬ 
tlement until such time as he would be all right. 

Q. Did Lancaster have the customers’ money ? A. It was 
in the name of the firm. 

Q. Did. he have it drawn out for his personal uses? A. 
He drew out a good deal of the money. 

Q. For his personal uses ? A. Yes, sir; for the use of 
the Big Muddy Iron Company and other things. 

Q. Why did you allow him to use the customers’ money ? 
A. Well, I don’t know why I allowed him ; it went on that 
way. 


68 


Q. How much of the customers’ money did he have at one 
time? A. Probably over $20,000. 

Q. How long did he have it ? A. No stated time ; money 
was coming in all the time and going out. 

Q. How came the customers not to know it ? A. It was 
not necessary that they should know it. 

Q. How much did you have on hand at one time for your 
customers ? A. We have had all kinds of amounts, along 
in the neighborhood of $20,000 and a little above that. 

Q. Was that about the average of it ? A. That was about 
the average of it. 

Q. During all of these years ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And he had $20,000 of that most of the time ? A. Yes, 
sir ; he had it pretty well used up in paying his obligations 
to the Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. Will you explain how it could be that he could have 
the money of the customers to about $20,000, which is your 
average, all of that time, and your customers still get their 
money from the firm ? A. We have always had means for 
getting money.; banks have always given us discounts, and 
no man ever called the second time for his money. 

Q. Did you advise these customers of the firm that their 
money was being used in that way ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Why didn’t you buy this property in your own name 
at the marshal’s sale ? A. I was acting under the advice of 
counsel and I did as they suggested. 

Q. What counsel advised you? A. Andrew W. Meade, 
Henry D. Laughlin, and Frank K. Ryan. 

Q. They were Mr. Lancaster’s attorneys too, were they 
not ? A. Ryan was my attorney and Laughlin was the at¬ 
torney of Lancaster. 

Q. And Mead, too ? A. Well, Mead was my attorney 
too ; he was the attorney for both of us. 

Q. When McDermot conveyed to O’Reilly, that deed was 
made at your instance, was it not ? A. It was. 

Q. What money did you get for that? A. I didn’t get 
any money. 

Q. How did you come to make him the deed ? A. Mr. 
Lancaster had borrowed—they together had borrowed $40,- 
000 on the property, and Lancaster was liable for $20,000 
and O’Reilly $20,000. I could soon see that the Main street 
property was not worth enough—the Main street property 
had gone down, and I advised him not to attempt to pay, 
and he went to O’Reilly and made arrangements to deed it 
to him. 

Q. And you acted on his arrangement? A. Yes, sir; 
O’Reilly seemed to think different. 


69 


Q. You made the deed on the arrangement that Lancaster 
made with O’Reilly ? A. I forget whether I made the deed 
or not; the property was under my control and I told Mc¬ 
Dermott to make the deed. 

Q. Tell we again whether yon had a written agreement 
with McDermott ? A. No, sir ; I did not; we didn’t need 
it; I was satisfied that he would do whatever I told him 
to do. 

Q. Yon had that confidence in him ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then whatever the arrangement was between Lancaster 
and O’Reilly yon don’t know of your own knowledge? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. You didn’t have any personal negotiations with 
O'Reilly ? A. No, sir ; I did not. 

Q. How did the deed from R. D. Lancaster to O’Reilly 
come to be made? A. From R. D. Lancaster to O’Reilly. 

Q. Yes, sir ; the subsequent deed, after McDermott con¬ 
veyed to O’Reilly by the record on September 20th, 1877 ? 
A." Yes, sir ; a subsequent deed after McDermott conveyed 
to O’Reilly by the record of September 20, 1877, Lancaster 
purports to give a quit-claim deed to O’Reilly. I don’t 
know how that came about ; I had nothing to do with that; 
I have no recollection of it. 

Q. Who got the rents for that property between the Mar¬ 
shal’s sale, in June, when it was conveyed to McDermott, 
and the conveyance that you directed to be made by McDer¬ 
mott to O’Reilly ? A. It was credited to McDermott on the 
books. 

Q. Who had the beneficial enjoyment of the rents ? A. 
It remained there for a number of years, until I finally 
made my final settlement. 

Q. The money remained where—in the firm proper ? A. 
Yes, sir ; to the credit of McDermott. 

Q. You mean the actual money was retained there subject 
to the call of yourself? A. Wes, sir; it was at my com¬ 
mand. 

Q. If you were using the customers’ money, why didn’t 
you use that? A. We used that too. 

Q. Then it didn’t remain there? A. The money didn’t 
remain there, but the account remained there ; we had to 
account for it. 

Q. You say the money was used ; how was it used—the 
same way the firm’s money was used ? A. .Yes, sir. 

Q. That is, advanced to Lancaster ? A. Lancaster drew 
out a great deal of money. 

Q. These rents were used by Lancaster—some of them ? 
A. Yes, sir. 


70 


Q. To pay his obligations to the Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany ? A. Yes, sir ; it was all in one pot and he drew it 
out. 

Q. Do you remember some property that Lancaster owned 
on Centre street, east line of Centre street, in Block 208 r 
that he got from John Cairns and wife ? A. Yes, sir. 
s Q. Do you know anything about that property ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Did the firm collect the rents of it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. For how long, do you remember the history of it ? A. 
We collected the rents of it until we sold it to James Laugh- 
lin. 

Q. Who is James Laughlin ? A. He is now dead. 

Q. Who was he ? A. I have no way of describing him ; 
I know he had a stepson named Haley. 

Q. Was he a patron of the firm ? A. Yo, sir ; he was an 
outsider. 

Q. Were you personally acquainted with him prior to the 
sale ? A. Not prior to the sale. 

Q. Did you engineer the sale to him ? A. Yes, sir ; I 
don’t recollect the details of it, but I know that he bought 
and paid for it. 

Q. Paid actual cash for it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you not mistaken about that; didn't he give a 
deed of trust? A. Well, whatever way it was closed ; that 
was a good many years ago, and I don’t know whether it 
was by cash or by deed of trust. 

Q. At any rate he paid a value for it ? A. Yes, sir ; he 
paid a value for it. 

Q. Is he any relation to Laughlin the attorney for Mr. 
Lancaster ? A. I think not, I never heard of it. 

Q. And he is dead ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What business was he in then ? A. He has left a stepson 
named M. F. Haley, who is an attorney at law, and he can 
tell you all about it; M. F. Haley, a young man who studied 
law in Madill’s office ; if you want to know anything about 
Laughlin he can tell you all about it; I know nothing about 
him any more than we sold him the property. 

Q. Do you remember some property on 13th and Clark 
avenue? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I believe that belonged to Lancaster at one time, did 
it not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Also bought from Cairns and wife? A. Yes, sir ; a 
part of the same property. 

Q. That was conveyed to Ed. Butler by deed of trust of 
September loth, 1875, was it not ? A. Yes, sir. 


71 


Q. According to the record, the consideration was $3,500. 
Were yon personally privy to and aware of the facts con¬ 
nected with that sale ; did yon have anything to do with it ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did yon have to do with it ? A. I think I drew 
the papers. 

Q. Did yon fix the price 2 A. No, sir ; I guess Lancaster 
fixed the price. 

Q. Did you pass the deed ? A. The deed was passed. 

Q. Did you receive money? A. We received $500. 

Q. From whom ? A. From Butler. 

Q. What did you do with it 2 A. Well, it went to Lan¬ 
caster ; he took that. 

Q. Butler gave a deed of trust back, dated December 15th, 
1875, to secure a part of the purchase money—3 notes each 
for $1,000, payable in 6 months, 12 and 18 months, even 
date. Do von remember that fact here stated 2 A. Yes, sir; 
I do. 

Q. How did you come to get hold of that deed of trust ? 
A. I took hold of that deed of trust and insisted on holding 
it; it was given to me to do as I pleased with. 

Q. For what purpose 2 A. As I said before to secure 
overdrafts of our customers’ money that had been paid out. 

Q. You were the junior member of the firm, were you not? 
A. Yes, sir ; but I was the active member of the firm. 

Q. At that time? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That was four years after you went in. Were you a 
man of means at that time ? A. What year was that ? 

Q. That was in 1875. A. I was a man of some little means. 

Q. Did you have much real estate ? A. In 1875, I don’t 
recollect that I had ; I had saved up- 

Q. How old are you ? A. About thirty-nine. 

Q. At that time you were about twenty-nine or twenty- 
seven, were yqu not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Just going into business, were you not ? A. I went to 
work so early in life that I felt I was pretty old. 

Q. Were you ever in business for yourself before you went 
with Lancaster ? A. No, sir ; I went in with him as a boy. 

Q. What real estate did you own when yoi\ went in with 
him as a boy in 1874 ? A. I think at that time I owned a 
little house up on Christy avenue and 20th or 21st streets. 

Q. Were you married then ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you married now ? No, sir. 

■ Q. What is that house worth ? A. I thought it was worth 
a good deal at that time ; it was worth about twelve or fif¬ 
teen hundred dollars. 



72 


Q. Is that all you owned then ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you get this deed of trust from Butler ? 
A. Just at the time it was executed. 

Q. You did, did you? A. Whatever time that was. 

Q. And you held it ever since ? A. I held it until 1883. 

Q. So Butler delivered the deed of trust to you, did he ? 
A. No,.sir. 

Q. To whom did he deliver it ? A. To Mr. Lancaster, to 
whom it belonged. 

Q. When did Lancaster deliver the deed to you—imme¬ 
diately ? A. I think immediately after. 

Q. What did you do with it when you got it ? A. I put 
it away in my private drawer and safe. 

Q. And held it there ? A. I had full control of it; yes, 
sir. 

Q. Did you pledge it at any time for money ? A. I think 
I did. 

Q. To whom ? A. To the State Savings Association. 

Q.When? A. Oh, I borrowed money there frequently, 
but I couldn’t give the date ; it was along between that time 
and 1883 or 1881. 

Q. On this mortgage ? A. Yes, sir; on that mortgage. 

Q. In connection with other collateral, or on that loan \ 
A. Well, on that loan. 

Q. Did it lay there for nine years—I don’t mean nine 
years ; it was satisfied in 1883, according to the record, was 
it not ? A. The money that I borrowed was a temporary 
arrangement for sixty or ninety days, and then we would be 
in funds, and I would take it up. 

Q. For whom was the money borrowed ? A. To pay peo¬ 
ple that we owed money to when they called for it. 

Q. It was borrowed for the firm, was it ? A. Yes sir. 

Q. To replace money that had been given to Lancaster ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And he paid the debt to the bank ? Yes, sir. 

Q. So that was in your possession from the 15th day of 
September, 1875, until it was satisfied April 4th, 1883, was 
it ? A. That is about the date. 

Q. With the exception of these uses of it ? A. Yes, sir; 
I had it. ' 

Q. How did that happen to be given back to Butler, or the 
property come to be .taken back, I mean ? A. That was be¬ 
tween Mr. Lancaster and Butler. Butler has frequently 
told me the story. 

Q. I don’t care for what Butler told you—hearsay testi¬ 
mony especially ? A. Then I have nothing to say. 


73 


Q. You don’t know of your own knowledge ? No, sir. 

Q. It was given back to him then under some arrange¬ 
ment between Butler and Lancaster of which you have no 
personal knowledge of your own ? A. I have heard. 

Q. I don’t care for that. A. I can give you that. 

Q. I don’t want Butler’s statements. Who conveyed to 
you the information that the deed of trust was to be can¬ 
celed ? A. Who conveyed to me that information ? 

Q. Yes, sir ; if the arrangement was made between But¬ 
ler and Lancaster, either one of them must have told you 
what to do with it. A. O ! Lancaster told me to cancel it; 
Lancaster wanted me to cancel it sometime before, but I - 
wouldn’t do it. 

Q. When was that ? A. Prior, about 1881. He received 
$10,000 from the Joliet Iron & Steel Company, which he 
never expected to get, and that kind of re-instated him back 
where he belonged, and he wanted me to release this prop¬ 
erty then, but I was not satisfied. 

Q. That’s what he told you ? A. He asked me to release 
those deeds of trust and I wouldn’t do it; I still held them 
two years after that. 

Q. There was some property on 8th and Carr street, bought 
by Lancaster from Ennis and wife ; do you remember that ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And there was a deed of trust put on that on June 
11th, 1874, for $11,879.20 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Ho you know anything about that mortgage ? A. That 
mortgage was made- 

Q. I mean of your own knowledge. A. Yes, sir; that 
money was raised on that mortgage. 

Q. Hid you see it raised? A. Yes, sir; the money was 
brought to the office ; at least it was given, if I recollect 
right, to the State Bank ; Lancaster was indorser for that 
amount of notes of the Joliet Iron and Steel Works, $11, - 
877 or whatever the amount is, and he gave them this mort¬ 
gage and they surrendered up the notes. 

Q. Hid you transact that business ? A. I know the notes 
were brought to me. 

Q. By whom? A. Well, Mr. Lancaster. 

Q. And that was his version of it ? A. That was his ver¬ 
sion. 

Q. Is that all you know about it? A. I know that he 
owed the amount in the bank and he told me that he had 
encumbered his property to take them up. 

Q. That mortgage was satisfied April 25th, 1876, accord¬ 
ing to the record ? A. Yes, sir. 
io» 



74 


Q. Now, on April 24th, 1876, there was a deed of trust 
put on by Lancaster and wife to James Ennis’ trustees, to 
secure a note for $15,000 at three years, and these six inter¬ 
est notes for $185, each one due for six months. Do you 
know anything about that mortgage ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What do you know about it ? A. Well, that mort¬ 
gage was made by the advice of counsel. 

Q. What counsel? A. Well, there were three of them. 

Q. The same three that you have named? A. Yes, sir; 
the same three. 

Q. Were you present when the advice was given ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Where was the advice given ? A. In our office here; 
I guess it was down in this old place here, in this building. 

Q. Given to whom ? A. Oh, I wanted some security, and 
they proposed to give it in that way. 

Q. That was given for you ? A. A T es, sir; that was given 
for me; there was no money raised on that $15,000 mort¬ 
gage. 

Q. How long did you hold it without using it ? A. I don’t 
know how long I held it without using it. 

Q. Why did you foreclose it just before the Marshal’s 
sale ? A. On the advice of my attorney, I foreclosed it. 

Q. Who gave you that advice ? A. Either Laughlin or 
Ryan. 

Q. Did he tell you to foreclose it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How much was the property worth that was included 
in that $15,000 mortgage ? A. It was not worth that much 
money. 

Q. Yon became the purchaser under the advice of your 
attorney—I mean you foreclosed ? A. I foreclosed, and I 
then got my brother James to buy it. 

Q. He is not now living, is he ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Then he bought it for you, did he ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And held it for you ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he give you a deed to it? A. He gave me back 
the deed of trust. 

Q. But the title being in him according to the record ; did 
he give you any deed back immediately ? A. No, sir ; he 
held it for me. 

Q. Did he give yon any agreement that he would hold it 
for yon ? A. Nothing more than a verbal agreement ; I 
thought it was as safe in his hands as in mine. 

Q. The same as with McDermott? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You had personal confidence in him ? A. Yes sir. 

Q. Suppose he had died ? A. At the same time I took the 


75 


deed of trust for $9,500, I was to provide against that—that 
was not necessary in this case, but at the same time I took 
a deed of trust for $9,500. 

Q. This figures in the record as a deed of trust of the same 
date, May 14th, 1877, for $9,500.00 at three years and six 
interest notes for $427.50 each to L. Freeman, as trustee ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who is L. Freeman? A. L. Freeman is Joseph H. 
Tiernan ; I don’t know him. 

Q. That was a fictitious name, was it ? A. That I don’t 
know. 

Q. Who selected that name ? A. My counsel ; I think 
Judge Laughlin suggested that name, he or Tty an. 

Q. Did you ever see L. Freeman ? A. No, sir ; I don’t 
know him. 

Q. Were the notes made payable to L. Freeman ? A. No, 
sir. 

' Q. To whom were they made payable? A. They were 
made payable to the party who executed the note; they were 
made payable to his order and by him endorsed ; they were 
payable to James Tiernan and he indorsed them. 

Q. Then he drew the notes to his own order ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And indorsed them ? A. Yes, and put them in the 
name of- 

Q. And the name only appeared in the deed, I suppose, 
and not on the notes—the name of Freeman ? A. The name 
of Freeman did not appear on the notes. 

Q. There is a statement here that there was a considera¬ 
tion of $9,500 paid by James Tiernan ; of course that was 
not paid, was it ? A. Yes, sir ; it was. 

Q. How? A. Money. 

Q. Cash ? A. Cash. 

Q. Passed back by him to you, I suppose ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, wasn’t that deed foreclosed at that time to beat 
the United States execution ? A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Don’t you know that to be the fact ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you not advised that that was the reason why 
you should do that ? A. No, sir ; not to beat the United 
States Government. 

Q. What was the occasion for any legal advice about it ? 
A. A fellow always has to have legal advice nowadays, or 
he will get into trouble, sure. 

Q. What was the trouble ? A. I always take legal ad¬ 
vice now in all matters. 

Q. Whether you see any difficulty in a thing or not ? A. 



76 


Yes, sir ; I think if Lancaster had done that he would have 
saved ten thousand dollars at one time. 

Q. Done what ? A. Taken legal advice. 

Q. How ? A. In the matter of the Collins’ note. 

Q. What was that matter? A. Henry Collins was Secre¬ 
tary of the Big Muddy Iron Company, and he gave his note 
for ten thousand dollars ; it was indorsed by O’Reilly and 
Lancaster and discounted in the State Bank, and it went to 
protest, and the State bank got judgment against Collins 
and the indorsers, O’Reilly and Lancaster. O’Reilly and 
Lancaster went to take up the note, and they had the judg¬ 
ment assigned to themselves ; they were their own attorneys 
and they found out that that wasn’t the way to do it ; if 
they had had advice it would have been transferred to a 
third party. In a year or two Mr. Collins made a great deal 
of money, and the judgment could have been made had that 
assignment been made correctly. They then hired a lawyer 
and fouud that the assignment was wrong, and the only way 
for them to get their money w T as to bring a new suit, which 
they did, and in the meantime Collins lost his money. 

Q. Was J. H. Service involved in that transaction? A. 
I don’t know him. 

Q. You did not hear of him in connection with it ? A. 
No, sir; I just want to show you that a fellow has to have a 
lawyer. 

Q. That is a doctrine that my profession will subscribe to, 
but still we don’t know why you needed a lawyer for this 
foreclosure ? A. Yes, sir; we did. 

Q. Why ? A. I was afraid of trouble. 

Q. Afraid of what—afraid of the United States were you 
not ? A. No, sir; I was afraid that I would make some mis¬ 
takes and lose it, and I wanted to protect myself. 

Q. Mistakes in what ? A. We might draw "the deed wrong 
or something. 

Q. What was the occasion for foreclosing this blank mort¬ 
gage on which no money was advanced, and laying in your 
hands at that particular time, two days before the Federal 
execution ? A. My lawyers told me to. 

Q. They were Lancaster’s lawyers too, were they not ? A. 
Yes,' sir. 

Q. You were simply following directions ? A. I wanted 
to be secured, and I did not care how it was done so that 
point was arrived at. 

Q. Secured from what ? A. So that I would not have all 
of these debts to pay; Lancaster had property, and I wanted 
it under my control to see that our people were protected. 


77 


Q. Why not keep the mortgage as security—why did you 
foreclose ? A. My counsel advised me that way. 

Q. Did’nt you, as an intelligent man, have opinions of 
your own? A. They overruled them. 

Q. Your own counsel overruled your opinions ? A. They 
knew better than I did, and I submitted to it; that is what 
T hired them for. 

Q. Did Lancaster have anything to do with overruling 
your opinion? A. Not that I recollect of. 

Q. You did’nt have any conversation with him abou that? 
A. I don’t recollect of any. 

Q. After this deed of trust had laid for a year, and it was 
two years before it was due, and it was within two days of 
the Federal judgment in the Federal Court against Lancas¬ 
ter on this bond, you by direction of attorneys who were al¬ 
so his attorneys, foreclosed the deed of trust, and took title 
in the name of another person,—is that so? A. Yes, sir ; 
that is it. 

Q. But you have no explanation to give of it, except that 
your attorney advised it? A. That is all. 

Q. Now, Mr. Tiernan, you really owned that property 
when it was in the name of James Tiernan, did you not ? A. 
I had full control of it. 

Q. It was improved property, as I understand it? A. 
Yes, sir ; I believe it was all improved. 

Q. In whose name were the rents collected ? A. In the 
name of James Tiernan. 

Q. In the name of James Tiernan ? A. Y$s, sir. 

Q. And he only died since 1888 ? A. No, sir ; he died in 
September, 1886. 

Q. What was actually done with the money that was col¬ 
lected, of course James Tiernan was a hgure head under 
those circumstances ? A. It was placed to his credit on the 
books. 

Q. Who got the beneficial use of the money ? A. The 
firm did, like they did of all other money. 

Q. Did this go the same way that the other money went ? 
A. Yes, sir. ® 

Q„ It went to Lancaster to help him out of the Big Muddy 
Iron Comxjany scrape ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Or to replace money given to him for that purpose ? 
A. We never drew a cent of it; it was to his credit and he 
could have come and demanded it. 

Q. Did you both have power to check on the firm’s ac¬ 
count ? A. Lancaster and myself ? 

Q. Yes, sir ? A. Yes, sir. 



78 


Q. You had as full power as he ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who actually checked out the money that went to 
Lancaster’s use? A. Both of us; sometimes there were 
notes to pay and lie told me to go and pay them and I 
would, or he would make it out himself. 

Q. It was indifferently done between you and him, ac¬ 
cording to circumstances ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You don’t mean to say that this money stayed in the 
bank to the credit of the firm during all the time from 1877 
to 1888, do you'; that it was not used? A. Oh, it was in 
this general pot ; it was used of course, like other money. 

Q. Can you state the amount that was collected from that 
property—what was the rental of it monthly ? A. Let me 
see, there were four pieces of property there, I think ; I will 
do some figuring for you. The 11th street property rents 
for about thirty dollars—11th and Christy avenue ; all four 
pieces of property would bring a monthly rental of about 
one hundred dollars. 

Q. For each or all ? A. For all ; one hundred dollars or 
probably a little over. 

Q. “ 50 feet on the east line of 8th street by 127 feet 6 
inches to alley.” Were there four pieces there? A. No, 
sir ; that is one piece. 11th street property rented for about 
$30 a month, Christy avenue for $20- 

Q. What has that got to do with that particular piece ? 
A. That deed of trust covered the four pieces of property ; 
I thought you asked for that. 

Q. All the property covered by the $9,500 ? A. Yes, sir ; 
that includes the four pieces of property. 

Q. Then what was it worth if it only rented for $100 ? A. 
It was worth 9 or 10 thousand dollars. 

Q, Did you ever pledge this $15,000 note.that your brother 
gave you ? A. I have. 

Q. Where ? A. To Mr. Gus Knueppel. 

Q. Who is he ? A. Well, I know him ; he keeps a place 
on Seventh and Chouteau avenue ; he is a saloon-keeper. 

Q. For how much did you pledge it to Kunoppel ? A. I 
borrowed $2,000 from him. 

Q. Is there any one else that you pledged it to ? A. No, 
sir ; I think not. 

Q. How long did Knueppel hold it ? A. I think he held 
it for a year—six months anyhow. 

Q. And then you paid him ? A. I paid him back. 

Q. And resumed control of the property ? A. I kept con¬ 
trol of the property all the time. 

Q. But the mortgage, I mean ? A. Y"es, sir. 



79 


Q. Whose check did you give him when you paid the 
$8,000? A. Lancaster & Tiernan’s check. 

Q. Now, is that the only time that you ever pledged that 
$9,500 note? A. That’s the only time I recollect of now. 

Q. When was this money borrowed from Knueppel ? A. 
In 1878, I suppose, or 1879, or somewhere along there. 

Q. And that debt was extinguished in 1880 or 1881 ? A. 
Yes, sir ; about 1880. 

Q. Why did you let it lie for two years ? A. I still wanted 
it for the purpose for which it was given to me-vto secure 
myself and customers ; Lancaster had not yet recovered 
himself. 

Q. Why didn’t you disclose your ownership of the mort¬ 
gage ? A. I was advised to do it in that way. 

Q. Advised by whom ? A. Judge Laughlin, or Ryan. 

Q. Why were you so advised ? A. I didn’t ask them why. 

Q. Didn’t you ask them for the advice after you stated 
the difficulty to them ? A. They knew ; I didn’t state any¬ 
thing to them. 

Q. How did they know ? A. Know what ? 

Q. You said “they knew; ” what did they know? A. I 
told them that Dick had overdrawn his account, and that 
he had real estate, and that that was about all that he did 
have, and that I wanted some security. 

Q. Did you know there was a judgment against Lancas 
ter for $9,500 in favor of the United States at that time, from 
1871 to 1883 ? A. I knew there was some judgment against 
him. 

Q. And you were present at the marshal’s sale, were you 
not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you knew that the property brought nothing ? 
A. Very little ; the difficulty with me was protection for 
myself and customers to whom I was indebted and liable ; I 
had nothing to do with that Government business. 

Q. Why did you conceal the ownership of the mortgage? 
A. I did that by advice of my counsel; they told me that 
was the best way to do it. 

Q. To do what ? A. To conceal my name. 

Q. What purpose did it serve to conceal your name ex¬ 
cept to conceal the interest of Lancaster in the property? 
A. I don’t know ; I didn’t ask them. If I employ counsel 
I do as they tell me ; I very often think they do foolish 
things. 

Q. Why was there a note for $9,500 and interest given on 
your direction by your brother on property that only rented 


80 


for $1,200, and tlie value of which you don’ t state to be over 

$ 10,000 ? 

[Counsel for plaintiff objects ; objection sustained.] 

Q. There is some property of 8th and Carr streets, Mr. 
Tiernan; do you remember that Lancaster owned that? A. 
That is the the same property that we have just been going 
through with. 

Q. They are two separate pieces, though ? A. This is a 
conveyance by you to Richard D. Lancaster, March 1st, 
1886. Do you remember of giving him a quit-claim deed at 
that time. 

Q. Do you remember that now? A. I bought that piece of 
property "for $1,800 from John Wangle, paid him cash for it. 

Q. How did you come to convey it to Lancaster ? A. I 
conveyed that to Lancaster—he and I had a settlement. 
What date did I convey it ? I don’t recollect the time. 

Q. I will tell you what the record says. A. I can explain 
what was done with it. That is a little different from the 
other. 

Q. The record says March 1 st, 1886, quit claim from you 
to Lancaster ? A. I bought that property and took it in my 
own name, and to cut the matter short, I bought another 
piece on Morgan street, and I held it in my own name. 

Q. Bought it under foreclosure sale ? A. No, I bought it 
from Col. Dorsheimer for $1,200; I thought it was cheap. 

Q. Bought it on your own account ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Lancaster have anything to do with it ? A. 
It was in my name, but for a period we were joint owners of 
the two pieces of property. When he went to the Custom- 
House, we had a general settlement ; I kept the Morgan street 
property, and deeded to him the Carr street property ; but 
during the time we held it we divided the rent, I took mine 
and he took his. 

Q. What period was it you held it? A. Lp to the 1st of 
January, 1886. We had a kind of settlement when he went 
to the Custom-House. I had two or three pieces of property 
in which he was interested. 

Q. This abstract which I have is a history of property 
which once stood in the name of Mr. Lancaster; that was 
what I asked for; I do not see why this should appear on it 
if it never stood in his name ? A. No, it never did; it was 
bought from John Nangle, and I collected the rents since I 
have been in the business. 

Q. When did you buy it ? A. In 1878 or 1879, may be 
later. 


81 


Q. You say that Mr. Lancaster had half interest it ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Was he buying property at that time ? A. I bought 
the property and bought it with the funds in the concern, 
kept it in my own name, and afterwards considered it was a 
kind of firm arrangement, and I deeded it to him. 

Q. The Morgan street property was the same way ? A. 
The Morgan street property was the same way. I retained 
that, that is mine exclusively. 

Q. But for a time he had a half interest in it ? A. Yes, 
sir ; he participated in the rents. 

Q. Where was the property on Morgan street ? A. Be¬ 
tween Fourteenth and Fifteenth. 

Q. That was never in his name? A. Yo, he never had 
anything to do with it. 

Q. What was it worth ? A. I bought it from Col. Dor- 
sheimer, I thought I bought it very cheap, I bought it for 
$ 1 , 200 . 

Q. Do you still think you bought it cheap ? A. I think 
so. * 

Q. What is it worth now ? A. It is assessed for $2,200 
or $2,300. Col. Dorsheimer had loaned money on it and it 
came to him in that way, and he didn’t want it, all he 
wanted was to get his money back and I gave him the cash 
for it. 

Q. The property on the north line of Lucas avenue and 
Sixteenth street Mr. Lancaster bought from Adams and 
wife ; do you remember that property ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Before we go to that, I suppose this property in Block 
251, of which you have spoken, on Eighth and Carr, the 
rents from that were collected by the firm? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did that figure as your property on the firm’s books ? 
A. It did, it was passed to my credit. 

Q. Do your books show a half interest in Mr. Lancaster? 
A. Yes, sir ; at the time of the settlement I transferred to 
him his interest and the other to myself. 

Q. The books show that ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Property on the north line of Lucas avenue and Six¬ 
teenth street, the property that Adams and wife conveyed to 
Lancaster on March 19th, 1863, and January 4th, 1864, De¬ 
lict Adams conveyed by trustee to Lancaster, do you remem¬ 
ber that property ? A. I know that property. 

Q. Were the rents on that collected by the firm ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. It was improved property, was it ? A. It was improved 
property. 


82 


Q. Now, on December 22d, 1875, that property was en¬ 
cumbered by a mortgage to the Citizens’ Savings Bank to 
Joseph O’Neill and Henry Yon der Au, trustees, do you re¬ 
member the occasion of giving that mortgage ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the occasion ? A. He owed $2,349.78 for 
endorsements on the notes of the Big Muddy Iron Company 
and he gave the Citizens’ Saving Bank a deed of trust. 

Q. That liability was on a note and as collateral security 
for which a lot of pig iron had been transferred ? A. Some¬ 
thing in connection with the Big Muddy Iron Company, I 
think it was a $6,000 note, that was the balance due on it 
and Mr. O’Neill sold the iron. 

Q. The collateral was sold and there was $2,349.48 due? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There was a mortgage given to secure it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you come to own that note ? A. I never 
owned that note. 

Q. Who owned it when it was foreclosed ? A. The Citi¬ 
zens’ Savings Bank. 

Q. They foreclosed it ? A. They foreclosed it. 

Q. May 14th, 1877, the record says, was it paid then ? A. 
It was paid. 

Q. Was it paid before it was foreclosed ? A. It was sold 
out under the deed of trust and the sale paid it. 

Q. Why did you suffer it to be sold ; why didu’t you pay 
it off ? A. I don’t know why. 

Q. This was just before the judgment was recovered ? A. 
That was the way we did it. 

Q. You bought it ? A. I bought it and paid for it. 

Q. How much did you pay for it ? A. $2,400. 

Q. About the amount of the note—the balance due ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you pay that in cash ? A. I paid that in cash. 

Q. Where did the money come from ? A. Out of the 
moneys in our hands. 

Q. At that time was the price you bid understood by you 
to be the whole balance due the Citizens’ Savings Bank on 
the note? A. The balance due the bank was $2,300, the 
amount indicated. 

Q. $2,349.78 it says, and eight per cent, from date, and 
you paid $2,400 ? A. $2,400 was what I bid and what I 
got it for. 

Q. Did that pay the bank out in full the balance of their 
debt ? A. That is my recollection of it. 

Q. Why did you convey the property to Mr. Lancaster ? 
A. I held that property until several years afterwards. 


Q. In 1883 ? A. I lield it, as I said before, to protect 
myself and our customers. 

Q. Who collected the rents between the time you bought 
it and the time- A. The firm of Lancaster & Tiernan. 

Q. Who had the beneficial use of the rents ? A. Who had 
the beneficial use ? It was collected and passed to my credit 
all the way through until I deeded it back to him. 

Q, What did you do with the rents ; did you appropriate 
them yourself ? A. No, sir ; I never took any of the rents. 

Q. What became of them ? A. It was passed to my credit, 
and when our customers liad all been paid off, and I was 
satisfied he was again solvent, I turned it over to him. 

Q. The rent between 1876 and 1888 ? A. I kept it separ¬ 
ate and accounted to him for it. I never made a dollar or 
lost a dollar by it. 

Q. On the property ? A. The property. 

Q. I am talking of the rents when you held the property % 
A. That stood the same way. 

Q. You accounted to Mr. Lancaster for the rents of the 
property ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You do not mean to say the money laid there unem¬ 
ployed during six years ? A. We never kept money unem¬ 
ployed. 

Q. How was it used? A. It was in the general pot, and 
we used it, advanced it to customers and discounted notes. 

Q. Used as the money of the firm ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. If Mr. Lancaster wanted it to pay his debts, he took 
it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Or for any other purpose ? A. Yes, sir ; and I did the 
same thing. 

Q. In the city block 528, east half of lot 2, block 1 of H. 
M. Dean’s addition, on the north line of Lucas avenue, do 
you remember that property, bought of Dockery and wife ? 
A. I think that is the same piece we spoke of. 

Q. That is on Sixteenth? A. That went to my 'brother 
Jim. 

Q. That has the same history? A. Yes,, sir; it all has 
the same history, it was included in one of the four pieces 
of property we were speaking of. 

Q. Now," this property, you say, was one of the four 
pieces of property you spoke. of as being covered by the 
$15,000 mortgage ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. For three years, with six interest notes, etc. ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. That has the same history as the other, going to you 



84 


by the mortgage sale, and finally being conveyed by you to 
Mr. Lancaster in 1883 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In whose name were the rents of the property entered 
f on the books of the company ? A. James Tiernan. 

Q. Your brother ? A. My brother ; those four pieces are 
the same as you examined me about this morning ; they all 
went alike. 

Q. You actually controlled it, and between you and Jim 
you owned it ? A. Had the full control of, it. 

Q. Hid Jim make a dollar out of it? A. No, sir; he 
didn’t want to ; and I didn’t, and I did not charge any¬ 
thing. 

Q. How often was that $9,500 note pledged while you con¬ 
trolled it; the one that James Tiernan gave the same day 
of the foreclosure to you, covering this property ? A. I do 
not know ; I frequently raised money in the State Savings 
and took them collaterals, I could not say how many times. 

Q. I suppose you gave bankable paper with this as col¬ 
lateral ? A. Our own note with this as collateral. 

Q. For bankable time—sixty and ninety days ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Can you say how often that was pledged there ? A. I 
cannot. 

Q. Can you state it was x>ledged as often as three times ? 
A. I think three times, or maybe more ; I know it was 
pledged two or three times ; when customers called for 
money and we didn’t have it, I would take that up. 

Q. Why was this property sold under foreclosure to Janies 
Tiernan instead of to you ? A. Counsel advised me to have 
it done in that way. 

Q. That is the only reason you know of ? A. That is the 
only reason. 

Q. And who were those counsel ? A. Judge Laughlin. 

Q. This is one transaction with the other that you have 
stated ? . A. And Mr. By an conducted the thing through. 

Q. We do not know whether we understand you clearly, 
you remember on some property there was a mortgage of 
$11,879.20, which was satisfied by A. W. Meade in 1876, do 
you recollect that mortgage ? A. Y"es, sir. 

Q. Hid you testify it was ever under your control ? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. What do you know about it? A. It was given to take 
up some endorsement of Mr. Lancaster in the State Bank. 

Q. How was that paid ? A. It was paid out of moneys. 
In a little while we collected money for people that did not 
call for it and we took the money and took the note up. 


85 


Q. Paid out of customers’ money ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Meade ever pay anything there with it ? A. 
It was negotiated through Mr. Meade ; my recollection is it 
was for the benefit of the State Bank, to secure endorse¬ 
ments. Mr. Lancaster had already endorsed paper of the 
Big Muddy Iron Company, and he owed so much money. It 
was made to Mr. Meade and endorsed by him. 

Q. He was an intermediary, he was not the beneficiary ? 
A. I do not recollect that Mr. Meade raised the money or 
took it to the bank, the money was raised. 

Q. He was Mr. Lancaster’s attorney at that time? A. He 
was Mr. Lancaster’s attorney. 

Q. How did he come to be the party that satisfied it on 
record? A. The note was payable to his order, and after it 
was taken up in the State bank he went and released it. It 
is customary. There are plenty of notes released in the 
Court-House by parties that way. 

Q. The first payee in the note? A. Yes, sir; although 
they have not got the money. 

Q. You got the rent from this property in Dean’s addi¬ 
tion while in Janies Tiernan’s name? A. It went through 
the same course. 

Q. Went in the partnership money? A. Went in the 
partnership money, and I accounted for it to Mr. Lancaster 
afterwards, and deeded it back to him. He did’nt claim 
anything for the services or claim anything for the rents. 

Q. When you came to settle with Mr. Lancaster he got 
the benefit of these rents, did he ? A. He got the benefit of 
them, yes sir. 

Q. How, there is some property on the East line of 
Eleventh street in city block 577, which Patrick Caulkin 
sold to Mr. Lancaster, November 4th, 1867, do you remem¬ 
ber that? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That was covered by the $11,879.20 mortgage ? A. It 
went through the same course. 

Q, Also the $15,000 mortgage ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And under foreclosure, James Tiernan bought that, 
was that the same sale ? A. Yes, sir; under the deed of 
trust for $11,000 there never was any foreclosure, that was 
paid off. There were three pieces of property in that. Af¬ 
terwards Mr. Lancaster made a deed of trust to Mr. Freeman 
for $15,000 covering four pieces, and Jim bought it under 
that deed of trust. 

Q. The rents were applied the same way from that ? A. 
Yes, sir ; all went in the same boat. 

Q. The piece in city block 972, in Stoddard’s addition, 


86 


Thomas street and Elliott avenue ? A. That was the extra 
piece put in. 

Q. That makes the fourth piece ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you get for this property—that appears to 
be deeded by James Tiernan, quit claim to R. D. Lancaster. 
I suppose it w T as at your instance? A. Yes, sir ; in Febru¬ 
ary, 1881, Mr. Lancaster recovered 810,000 which he never 
expected to get, and was then in pretty fair circumstances, 
and I held it two years longer. During that time we had 
made money, and I felt he was perfectly solvent, and asked 
Jim to deed it back., I had no further interest in it than to 
protect myself and the customers. 

Q. Where did he get that money from ? A. From the 
Joliet Iron Company, $9,999.99. He had $20,000 of stock in 
the Joliet Iron Company, which he had to take through, get¬ 
ting mixed up with the Big.Muddy, and the Joliet Iron 
Company, in a few months, failed, and that was carried on 
our books at something over $20,000, and we considered it 
lost. In February, 1881, Frank Bowman came to our office 
and said there had been something going on wrong in the 
management of the Joliet Steel Works, and he proposed to 
rip it up, and thought by getting a fee he could get some¬ 
thing, and afterwards I went into the Boatmen’s and got 
$10,000, less one cent. 

Q. Was that net ? A. Yes, sir ; I collected it from Mr. 
Lackland at the Boatmen’s Bank myself. 

Q. About what date ? A. February, 1881. 

Q. How much were you behind with thejcustomers of the 
firm at the time he came in with the $10,000 ? A. I do not 
know; I know he had recovered considerable and he was 
getting on his feet again. 

Q. How much was the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan behind 
at that time ? A. I don’t know. 

Q. Was it behind at all % A. It was behind some. 

Q. How much ? A. If we had been called on to settle up 
we would have been $10,000 ox $12,000 short. 

Q. That was in mortgages, practically invested in mort¬ 
gages ? A. Hot invested, they were put up. There was no 
money raised on them. 

Q. Raised on any of them? A. There was one $11,000 
note and one $15,000 note. 

Q. On Second and Angelica street there was property that 
Mr. Lancaster acquired from Mason and wife ; do you re¬ 
member that ? A. Yes, sir ; I do. 

Q. Deeded by Lancaster and wife to George P. Pender. 


87 


grast December 16th, 1875 ; do you know Pendergrast ? A. 
I do. 

Q. Who was he ? A. He is a contractor, a sewer builder. 

Q. Building for the firm of Lancaster &' Tiernan, having 
business relations with them ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Pretty close ? A. He always has been a friend of ours, 
we collect his rents ; a friend of mine, at least. 

Q. Yon gave him work to do ? A. We did at that time. 
He is above job work now. 

Q. Was that a bona fide sale to Pendergrast ? A. Bona 
fide in this way, it was given to Pendergrast to hold for me. 

Q. Why not given to you to hold for yourself ? A. My 
counsel advised me to do it that way. 

Q. In this particular transaction you recollect something 
about it yourself ? A. I recollect I wanted control of it 
until- 

Q. Couldn’t you get control of it by deeding to you di¬ 
rect ? A. I could. 

Q. Why didn't you do it that way ? A. My lawyers told 
me not to do it. 

Q. On what representations ? A. I made no inquiry about 
it. 

Q. You simply and docilly followed their advice ? A. I 
hire men and pay them for that. 

Q. You do not know what the facts were on which the 
attorneys gave you the advice ? A. I stated the fact. 

Q. You did state the facts? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What facts did you state that made it imperative to 
make Mr. Pendergrast the trustee rather than yourself ? 
A. The fact was that Mr. Lancaster had been using money 
of the firm to pay up his obligations on account of the Big 
Muddy Iron Company, and I wanted to hold it to protect 
our customers, if I would have to pay then. 

Q. That would account for deeding the property to you, 
but why to Pendergrast ? A. I do not know why they did 
it in that roundabout way. 

Q. Your attorneys advised you ? A. My attorneys ad¬ 
vised me. I had confidence in Mr. Pendergrast; I knew it 
was the same as the other party. 

Q. There was no money passed on that deed ? A. No 
money passed on that deed at all. 

Q. He gave you back a deed of trust to secure 83,000 of 
the same date?" A. Yes, sir, I suppose so; I believe that is 
the fact. 

Q. The record shows it ? A. That is correct; that was 
given to make it further under my control, in case of his 



88 


death, that I could foreclose it and get the title in me. As 
it stood that way it was in my name. I felt as long as he 
lived, it was sure, and I made it doubly sure. My attorneys 
advised me to do so. 

Q. Your attorneys were Mr. Lancaster’s attorneys? A. 
Two of them were. 

Q. Which two ? A. Mr. Laughlin and Mr. Meade. 

Q. It appears from the record that you did not hold the 
deed of trust very long, at least that on December 18th, 1879, 
it was satisfied by R. D. Lancaster; was it paid then ? A. 
December 13th, 1879. 

Q. It appears to be satisfied by R. D. Lancaster? Yes. 
A. I don’t recollect as to the date. I know I sold the prop¬ 
erty, if I recollect right, to Oscar Reid. Is there something 
about that ? 

Q. Later on. I am trying to find out why the deed of 
trust was satisfied, and Mr. Lancaster appears to be the 
party to satisfy it in 1879, instead of you ? A. I held it as 
collateral; I had a right to turn it back to him at any time. 

Q. You had the right to turn it back ? A. Of course. 

Q. Did you turn it back ? A. I forgot the particulars. 
If it appears that way in the record it must be so. 

Q. On January 10th, 1878, it appears that Pendergrast 
conveyed to you by warranty excepting a deed of trust; did 
you pay Pendergrast anything for it then? A. No, sir. 

Q. He conveyed it under the original arrangement ? A. 
Under the arrangement there was no money between us. 

Q. Did you ask him to convey it to you ? A. I think 
there was some little difficulty between Pendergrast and 
Lancaster and he said he didn’t want to be bothered with it. 

Q. Who said he didn’t want to be bothered ? A. Pen¬ 
dergrast. 

Q. Is Pendergrast living ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where does he live A. In St. Louis County. 

Q. Whereabouts ? A. On Emmett road, I think it is. 

Q. Near Clayton ? A. Not as far out. 

Q. Do you know what the difficulty was of your own 
knowledge ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Who told you ? A. He told me. 

Q. Did Mr. Lancaster tell you? A. Mr. Pendergrast. I 
think it was some financial trouble between them. 

Q. Did Mr. Lancaster tell you about it ? A. I do not 
recollect of his saying anything about it. 

Q. Then Mr. Pendergrast made the deed of his own 
motion, he wanted to get rid of it? A. Wanted to get rid 
of it, he felt he held it for me and he wanted to get rid of it. 


89 


Q. He was holding it for you and you for Mr. Lancaster; 
that was it ? A. That was it. 

Q. Did you advise with your counsel at that time as to 
how things should be done ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Which one ? A. Mr. Ryan. 

Q. On December 12th, 1879, about two years later you 
conveyed that property to Oscar Reid ; was that a bona fide 
sale ? A. That was a bona fide sale. 

Q. That was a plain business transaction. How much 
money did you get ? A. $2,000. 

Q. That is what it says, but there seems to be a deed of 
trust of the same date ? A. That deed of trust was only 
held, and does not figure in it, whatever that calls for in the 
record is the amount. 

Q. Joseph H. Tiernan (single) to Oscar Reid, December 
12th, 1879, warranty, consideration $2,000 ; Oscar Reid to 
Joseph H. Tiernan’s trustee, same date, to secure one note 
for $746.65 at one year, and one for $708.65 at two years, 
ten per cent, from maturity ? A. It was one-third cash, 
which was $666.66, and the balance in one and two years. 

Q. Who got the money that Reid paid ? A. That came 
in and was passed to the credit of Joseph H. Tiernan. 

Q. The same way as the other did ? A. The same as the 
rent money. 

Q. It was held for Mr. Lancaster ? A. It was held until 
the final settlement and went to him. I did not expect any 
profit. 

Q. That deed of trust was 'satisfied by you on December 
14th, 1881 ? A. That is about the time the sale was made. 

Q. There is a remaining piece of property, lot in block 
1986, a lot on Compton avenue south of St. Charles road ; 
do you remember that property ? A. I do. 

Q. Was the rent of that collected by Lancaster & Tier¬ 
nan ? A. Wo, sir. 

Q. Why not? A. That is Mr. Lancaster’s homestead. 

Q. He has lived in that from the time he bought it, or 
thereabouts, until the present time ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he live there in 1868, when he bought it ? A. Did 
he buy as early as 1868 ? 

Q. That is what it says—William Henry and wife to R. 
D. Lancaster, March 27th, 1868? A. I thought it was a 
little later. 

Q. He moved into it soon after he bought it ? A. Yes, 


sir. 

Q. Did you collect any rent for that ? A. He has been 
living there all the time. 

12a 


90 


Q. Deed of trust, May 17th, 1878, to B. J. Van Court’s 
trustee for $3,150; do you remember about that deed of trust? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What do you remember about it ? A. The dbed of 
trust was put on there like the others to secure me. 

Q. You held it ? A. I held it. 

Q. You held it then when the Marshal sold the property ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you think the Marshal knew the nature of the 
deed of trust transaction ? A. My recollection is that Mr. 
Ryan announced at the sale there was a deed of trust on the 
property. 

Q. And it was bought at the sale by P. D. Keating ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember whether Mr. Keating paid $53 or 
not; do you remember the amount ? A. I do not recollect. 

Q. Did you ask Mr. Keating to buy ? A. I did not. 

Q. Who did ask him, do you know ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know he was going to buy? A. I didn’t ; I 
held the mortgage, that was all I wanted. 

Q. Did you ever pledge that mortgage in bank ? A. I 
have pledged that mortgage. 

Q. At what bank ? A. That is the one I think I pledged 
to John R. Slevin for $1,200. 

Q. Anybody else? A. Yo one that I recollect of. 

Q. How long did Slevin hold it ? A. Slevin held that 
probably four or five months. 

Q. When was that ? A. iLwas after- 

Q. Was that before or after the Marshal’s sale? A. 
What was the date of the Marshal’s sale ? 

Q. It was June 21st, 1877. A. It was after the Marshal’s 
sale; in 1878. 

Q. Then at the time of the Marshal’s sale you had not 
pledged it to anybody ? A. Yo, sir. 

Q. It was just lying there ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It didn’t represent any money advanced on it, did it ? 
A. Yo, sir ; only to secure me. * 

Q. Mr. Keating was Mr. Lancaster’s brother-in-law ? A. 
I think so. 

Q. After the Marshal’s sale to Keating, did the firm con¬ 
tinue to collect the rents ? A. There were no rents ? 

Q. So far as you know, did Mr. Lancaster pay any rent 
to Keating ? A. I do not know of any rents he ever paid 
to Keating. 

Q. When Keating transferred to Lancaster, did that fig- 



91 


ure in your settlement with Lancaster? A. No, sir; niv 
deed was ahead of Keating’s. 

Q. The quit-claim of Keating to Lancaster, April 10th, 
1883, cut no figure in your settlement with R. D. Lancaster ? 
A. No, sir ; cut no figure with me at all. 

Q. Were you paid any money when you satisfied the 
mortgage for $3,150 on April 13th, 1883 ? A. No, sir. 

Q. So far as I can see, the mortgage was held by you 
under the same circumstances as you have stated the Butler 
mortgage of December 15th, 1875, and the James Ennis 
mortgage of $15,000, of April 24th, 1876. How did James 
Ennis happen to figure there? A. I don’t know liow that 
came to us; I do not know him. 

Q. Was there any James Ennis? A. Ido not know of 
any, I never saw him. 

Q. He is the same kind of a man as L. Freeman? A. I 
never saw either one of them. 

Q. You did not hold the $2,349 on the Lucas avenue 
property at any time ? A. No ; the Citizens’ Savings Bank 
held that and sold it under it. 

Q. You held the mortgage of James Tiernan to L. Free¬ 
man’s trustee for $9,500? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You held the Pendergrast mortgage dated December 
15th, 1875, for $3,000? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You held the Yan Court mortgage, did you? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Who was’Yan Court? A. He was a gentleman, B. J. 
Yan Court, he lives in Illinois. 

Q. Did he know about the use of his name ? A. I think 
he did. 

Q. Did he assent to it ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. Is he a relative of Mr. Lancaster’s ? A. Not that I 
know of. 

Q. Did he ever do any work for the firm ? A. I under¬ 
stood so. 

Q. Did he understand the transaction ? A. I think he 
was made acquainted with it. 

Q. That was for $3,150? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever hold the $11,879 note ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Never held it at all ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Not after it was paid ? A. No, sir. 

Q. That makes a total according to my figuring of $20,- 
650. You have only stated to us that you received on that 
as I remember $1,200 from Slevin and $3,000 from Kneup- 
pel, those were the only amounts that I recollect. Are there 


92 


others ? A. I have used it frequently in bank, but there 
was no occasion to use it for the full amount, I only held it 
as a safeguard. If our customers made a run on us I wanted 
to be in a fix to go and get the money. 

Q. That is about the extent of the actual use of it? A. 
I have used it several times for small amounts in the State 
bank. 

Q. What do you mean by small amounts ? A. $500 or 
$1,000 to get a discount of sixty or ninety days, and take it 
up again. 

Q. Anything more outside of that ? A. No, sir ; I have 
borrowed money from my brother Jim at one time. I never 
put up collaterals because he knew it was perfectly safe. 

Q. Will you explain how the $5,000 raised on that took 
the place in the deficit in the customers accounts of $20,000 ? 
A. The customers never called for the money. 

Q. How long did you have it there as a rule ? A. It was 
coming in and going out. We would settle the first day of 
the month, and the next day collect $300, and that we would 
not account for for the next month. There never was any 
rush on us. 

Q. Do the books show these payments made to Mr. Lan¬ 
caster the overdrafts ? A. Do our books show it ? 

Q. Yes ? A. Yes, sir; show all he has drawn out, show 
his whole transactions, all he has drawn out. 

Q. Do they show he drew out $20,000 or more of the cus¬ 
tomers’ money ? A. I suppose at times he was overdrawn 
more than that. 

Q. How much? A. Probably $25,000 or $26,000. 

Q. He had it all through the years from 1871 until 1882 
or 1883—you say he didn’t get on his feet until 1881 ? A. 
About 1881, the $10,000 was the thing that helped him 
along. 

Q. Did that pay him out? A. No, he had been making 
money all the years. 

Q. Why didn’t you satisfy some of the mortgages when 
money came in ? A. I didn’t feel like it. 

Q. Why not ? A. I thought it was safer for me to wait 
until he got in better condition. 

Q. Safer for you ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Safer for him ? A. I was not paying attention to that. 

Q. When you had security for $20,000? A. If at any 
time the customers came in and asked for money I never 
could pay them without leaving them to go to the bank and 
raise money. 



93 


Q. The $3,000 mortgage was on property that was worth 
how much? A. It was sold for $3,500, it was worth about 
that. 

Q. That was about the amount of the mortgage ? A. That 
was about the amount of the mortgage. 

Q. Did you consider that a safe investment for money of 
the customers where the mortgages were the full value of 
the property ? A. I considered it a protection to me. If 
there had been a deficiency I would have to pay it up. 

Q. When did you say the $10,000 came in? A. In Feb¬ 
ruary, 1881, I think it was. 

Q. When did Mr. Lancaster first begin to overdraw ? A. 
When he bought in the Big Muddy Iron Company, in 1874. 

Q. 1874 ? A. In 1873. 

Q. In 1874 the Big Muddy Iron Company had failed ? 
A. When he went in he took$45,000 of stock. 

Q. They had suspended in 1874 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then the liabilities fell on him at once ? A. The 
greater part of them. The Joliet was considered good a long 
time. 

Q. Do you understand there was a deficit in the firm ac¬ 
count if anybody had asked for their money from 1874 or 
1875 up to 1881, from $15,000 to $20,000 or $25,000 ? A. 
From 1874 to 1881 ? 

Q. Yes ? A. There was very near it. 

Q. That was not discovered" by the customers ? A. The 
real estate was there in my yjossession to protect them; I held 
it for them. 

Q. The fact the money was not there for their use never 
was discovered in the six years ? A. Every man got his 
money ; nobody came a second time for money. 

Q. You paid quarterly ? A. Quarterly some years, some 
run along in stated times ; the majority were monthly. 

Q. Nine-tenths? A. No, sir. 

Q. Eight-tenths ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Six ? A. Probably six. 

Q. Some were quarterly ? A. Some were quarterly and 
some came once a year, after we paid the taxes. 

Q. Who were the tenants you settled with yearly; can you 
name any that you settled with yearly ? A. Pezolt; he lives 
in France, we only settled with him once a year. 

Q. Can you state about how much was the total rent roll 
that was paid yearly? A. No, I can’t state the total, I 
don’t know how much it was, probably a tenth. 

Q. One-tenth of the whole ? A. Yes, sir. 


94 


Q. Then your books, if examined, will show a deficit dur¬ 
ing all that time between the money actually on hand for 
customers and the money that ought to be on hand by the 
books ? A. They would in actual cash, but I held the real 
estate. I could have gone out any moment and raised every 
dollar to pay every man that came in town. 

Q. But not actual cash? A. The actual cash was not 
there. 

Q. What could you have raised the money on l A. On 
mortgages. 

Q. What was the property worth that was covered by 
$20,650 of mortgages? A. That was along about the value 
of the property, it may have been a little more. I didn’t 
mind the margin as long as I was secured to that extent. I 
didn’t want it all to come on me. I didn’t know what Mr. 
Lancaster’s endorsements on the Big Muddy might be; if it 
had been a little more it would have busted him up entirely 
and would have to pay it. I was not looking for the Big 
Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. You never used it to raise money on only $3,000 plus 
$1,000, plus $1,200, plus $1,000 ? A. I have used it in bank. 
I used it whenever occasion required it; no man ever came 
there twice for his money. I was always in a condition to 
pay every man that came. 

Q. And all this property was reconveyed to Mr. Lancaster 
by you, the property of which you held the apparent title; 
the property on which you held the mortgages; speaking of 
both, the first was conveyed to Mr. Lancaster, and in the 
second case the mortgages were satisfied about the same 
date, April 4th, 1883 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q, How much money did you receive from Mr. Lancaster 
when that was done ? A. Nothing; it was just on our books 
and run along till he got out of debt. 

• Q. Out of debt to the firm? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did he pay back his account to the firm ? A. 
He had made money enough up to that time to justify me 
in conveying it back to him. I was satisfied that he" had 
paid up the Big Muddy Iron Company and everything else. 

Q. Hid he pay it by depositing money with you or the 
profits in the firm?. A. The profits in the firm, the running 
account. 

Q. He never put any money back into the firm to replace 
that which was drawn out, it stood till the profit amounted 
to that? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Ho the books show that ? A. Yes, sir. 


Q. He was not in any other business than the real estate 
business ? A. No, sir; not at that time. 

Q. Well, then I understand you to say that the individual 
account of R. D. Lancaster with your establishment in the 
ledger, will show profit sufficient to wipe out all indebted¬ 
ness to the firm which you say at one time amounted to $25,- 
000, is that so f A. The books will show he was in a sol¬ 
vent condition, that everything had been paid up. 

Q. Will they show the $25,000 in profits came in on his 
account on his share to replace the $25,000 of money drawn 
out by him from the customers 5 money ? A. Yes, sir; they 
will show that. 

Q. Will they show it by an entry or a number of entries ? 
A. A number of entries. 

Q. Running back from time to time, during the whole 
period? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you any objection to producing the books per¬ 
sonally ? A. I have no objection; I do not personally want 
a lot of strangers gazing-over the books of our customers. 

Q. Suppose we only examine a part of the individual ac¬ 
count of yourself and Mr. Lancaster? A. The court has de¬ 
nied that; I do not want to overrule the court. 

Q. The court will grant it if you do not object. I only 
ask you if you object or not ? A. I object. 

Q. When money Avas paid to a partner on account of 
profit, was his recent taken in the receipt book for the firm 
check ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Was it paid in check or cash ? A. Neither. 

Q. How was it done ? A. It was passed to his credit in 
the account. 

Q. Yes ; it had to be drawn from the bank account, did 
it not ? A. No, it remained there in bank. 

Q. When he actually drew it out, he had to get a check 
for it ? A. He never drew out any specific amount ; if he 
took $50 it was taken from the draw. It was in the state¬ 
ment. 

Q. That would not give him the money ? A. Frequently 
he would draw it out before. 

Q. You had not drawn yours out? A. No, it stood on 
the books. 

Q. How did you get it ? A. I might buy a house and pay 
for it. 

Q. Either partner might draw checks on the bank account ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You have all of your checks ? A. I suppose so, pretty 
near. 


96 


Q. In that case would he give a receipt in the check book ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Who knows about these overdrafts besides you ? A: 
I do not know that anybody does. 

Q. Mr. Lancaster ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Outside of you two, do your attorneys know about it ? 
A. I guess they do. 

Q. Nobody elte ? A. No, sir. 

Q. When you held the property in the name of James 
Tiernan, McDermott, Pendergrast and others, who knew 
about that besides you and Mr. Lancaster ? A. Every man 
in the office. They didn’t know what was to be done with 
it. The rents were credited to James Tiernan and myself 
and Butler. I don’t think anybody knew. 

Q. Why did you conceal it? A. It was nobody’s busi¬ 
ness. I can hold my tongue once in a while. 

Q. When you took rents from tenants did you give a re¬ 
ceipt? A. We generally do. 

Q. Did you give them a firm receipt ? A. A firm receipt. 

Q, The principal’s receipt ? They were made out in the 
principal’s name and signed by Lancaster & Tiernan, agents. 

Q. Made out for the principal ? A. John Smith, debtor 
to Joseph H. Tiernan, received payment by Lancaster & 
Tiernan. 

Q. You would say John Smith, debtor to McDermott in¬ 
stead of saying debtor to Joseph H. Tierman \ A. Yes*, sir; 
I would use McDermott’s name, 

Q. You studiously concealed this? A. Yes, sir. 

- Q. And the only explanation you can give is, it was no¬ 
body’s business ? A. I said my counsel advised me so. 

Q. Their reason for so advising you was perfectly unintel¬ 
ligible to you ? A. I did not know their reason. 

Q. Is it not a fact the property was manipulated under 
the direction of Mr. Lancaster, with your assistance, for the 
purpose of preventing the collection of the judgment for 
$25,000 and costs in favor of the United States ? A. No. sir. 

Q. That is not true ? A. No, sir. 

Q. You had no such intent ? A. No, sir. 

Q. When did these overdrafts of Mr. Lancaster begin; 
can you state the date of the first? A. They commenced 
when he got in the Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. Were they before or after he went on Busby’s bond ? 
A. They were before. 

Q. How long before ? A. The first deed of trust was in 
June, 1874. 


97 

Q. When was it he went on Busby’s bond ? A. In Au¬ 
gust, 1874. 

Q. Did you know Busby \ A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you have any interview with him when he went on 
the bond ? A. I was in Europe at that time. 

Q. Did you take any steps to get him oft* of the bond ? A. 
He had taken steps before I returned. 

Q. When did you return % A. In November, 1874. 

Q. How did you know he had taken steps ? A. He told 
me all about it. 

Q. Mr. Lancaster told you ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You knew in November, 1874, he was on Busby’s 
bond ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you have any advice with your attorneys touching 
the matter of his getting off of that bond ? A. I do not re¬ 
collect any. 

Q. When was the suit brought on the bond \ A. I do not 
know. 

Q. When did you first learn there was a threatened lia¬ 
bility on the bond ? A. When I got home from Europe, Mr. 
Lancaster told me he was on the bond, and he was very sorry 
for it. 

Q. Why was he sorry for it % A. He saw in the news¬ 
papers about the whiskey ring. 

Q. He was afraid he might be implicated which would 
make a liability on the bond ? A. I suppose that was the 
reason. 

Q. When did you learn that ? A. I do not recollect the 
date exactly, sometime after my return home. 

Q. Had he succeeded in getting off them or was he in pro¬ 
cess of doing that % A. I do not know. 

Q. You knew the suit was brought ? A. I did; I do not 
know the date. 

Q. When you were making the transfers and taking the 
property in the name of McDermott, James Tiernan and 
others, taking mortgages where no money was actually ad¬ 
vanced on them, you knew the United States Government 
was suing Mr. Lancaster on the bond, did’nt you ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Cross Examination by Mr. Laughlin. 

Q. What were Mr. Lancaster’s losses in the Big Muddy 
Iron Company in the aggregate ? A. His losses were over 
$100,000; 102,000 and some odd dollars. 

Q. Between what dates were those moneys lost in that ven¬ 
ture \ A. He originally went into the Walls Mining and 


98 


Manufacturing Company, put $10,000 in that concern; I for¬ 
got the year; probably 1871 or 1872. 

Q. Between that time, and the summer of 1874, were all 
of those losses actually made by Mr. Lancaster ? A. They 
were made at that time. 

Q. Had they been made? A. You see, when the Big 
Muddy Iron Company bursted up, we took $20,000 in the 
Joliet, and we thought that was good. 

Q. Were the losses made at that time? A. They were 
understood as made, they were carried on the books. 

Q. He lost between the time he went in in the summer of 
1871, and the summer of 1874, over $100,000 in the Iron 
Company ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At the time he went on the bond was it known that his 
losses were so heavy as a matter of fact ? A. The losses had 
not matured, they were there. 

Q. Well, the extent of the loss was not known ? A. It 
was not known. 

Q. Ho you remember now, in a general way, that Mr. Lan¬ 
caster was on the bond less than sixty days, that within 
sixty days from the time he signed it he went and insisted 
on the collectors giving a new bond, and a new bond was 
given ? A. The bond was given in August, 1874. 

Q. The bond he signed ? A. That I have learned since. 
I went to Europe and had bad health; I went away in July; 
I don’t know when he got off. 

Q. Ho you remember that when you got back in Novem¬ 
ber and learned of it, a new bond had been given ? A. He 
told me, he, unfortunately, had gone on the bond, and had 
tried to get off or was off. 

Q. Suit was brought on the 15th of October, 1875 ? Ho 
you remember as a matter of fact, it was nearly a year after 
he got off the bond that the suit was brought by the Gov¬ 
ernment ? A. I don’t recollect the time, it was quite a time. 

Q. He begun to give deeds of trust to meet the Big Muddy 
Iron Company losses before he signed the Busby bond ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. That was done when he gave Meade the deed of trust 
for $11,000 ? A. That was done in June, 1874, two months 
before he went on the bond. 

Q. Ho you remember, as a matter of history, that it was in 
the year 1875 that the whiskey ring explosion occured ? A. 
It was about that time. 

Q. Ho you remember whether, when these investigations 
were begun, that Mr. Lancaster was already off of the bond 


99 


or liad been for sometime ? A. Yes, sir ; he was off some¬ 
time before that'time. 

Q. Do you remember the aggregate of the deed of trust that 
you held to secure moneys that had been drawn from the 
firm to pay the Big Muddy debts ? A. I believe that Mr. 
Glover has figured it up for me. 

• Q. I will give you the dates, I believe Mr. Glover doubles 
it up there. There was one deed of trust for §15,000, wasn’t 
there ? A. Yes, sir ; but that don’t count. 

Q. That afterwards became $9,500 ? A. $9,500. 

Q. Then the next deed of trust was the Butler deed of 
trust ? A. That was $3,000. 

Q. The Pendergrast deed of trust was what ? A. $3,000, 
I believe. 

Q. As a matter of fact when you sold the Pendergrast 
property you lost $1,000, the property sold for $1,000 less ? 
A. Yes, sir ; sold for $2,000, the deed of trust was $3,000. 

Q. The Van Court deed of trust was $3,000 ? A. $3,150, 
h£ added six months interest. 

Q. Was that the aggregate of the deeds of trust from the 
time the Tiernan deed of trust was given ? A. That was all. 

Q. Yow what was the total of the deeds of trust you held ? 
A. That would be $18,650. 

Q. What was the amount of Mr. Lancaster’s indebtedness 
to the firm for moneys he had drawn out, for which the 
firm was liable to the customers of the firm which they had 
collected at the time ? A. What time is that ? 

Q. At the time of the four deeds of trust that he put into 
your hands to protect you ? A. An average of $20,000, 
sometimes over and sometimes less. 

Q. Did Mr. Lancaster have property enough to satisfy 
you without encumbering his homestead ? A. He had not. 

Q. Did you insist, as a matter of fact, to include in these 
encumbrances his homestead ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At the time the things were done did you know or did 
he know, so far as you know, to what extent he was still in¬ 
volved in the Big Muddy losses? A. He begun to think 
there was no end to them at one time. 

Q. At this time you thought there was no end to his losses 
in the Big Muddy ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Besides your creditors, were you endeavoring to se¬ 
cure the furnace when you took the deed of trust ? A. The 
creditors of the firm that I would have to settle with. 

Q. As against what debt ? A. The Big Muddy debts. 

Q. That you didn’t know when they would end ? A. 


100 


That was the only thing I had in mind; that was the only 
thing I was afraid of. 

Q. What was the average profit of the firm of Lancaster 
& Tiernan from the 1st of January, 1875, until the 1st of 
January, 1883 % A. Do I have to answer that ? We have 
made anywhere from $8*000 to $12,000 a year. 

Q. Is that net or gross ? A. Let me see, what did we make 
net ? That is what was left for us. 

Q. Left for the partners ? A. $8,000 to $10,000. One year 
we made only $7,000. 

Q. That varied in different years % A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Your books will show it % A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It averaged from $7,000 to $10,000 ? A. I think as 
high as $12,000 one year, and as low as $7,000 one year ; 
that is my recollection of it. 

Q. Those profits, I suppose, were divided between the 
partners % A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And did you make a profit over and above what you 
drew for living expenses, or was that taken out \ A. What 
we drew out for living expenses were taken out of that ; the 
expenses of the office were taken out of that; the clerk hire 
and things of that kind. 

Q. You say the rents were collected from those parties, 
some in the name of McDermott and some in the name of 
James Tiernan. What did the profits amount to after pay¬ 
ing the taxes and repairs upon the property ' A. They 
amounted to very little, is my recollection of it. 

Q. From ail this property can you tell about what it was 
—the net income ? A. The property was very old, and the 
taxes pretty nearly ate up the income, the rent, and what¬ 
ever it was. 

Q. Do you mean to say the net income from the property 
was merely nominal 1 A. Yery nearly so in comparison with 
the value at which it stands. 

Q. Very nearly the net income after paying the taxes and 
repairs % A. It was old and dilapidated. 

By Mr. Glover : 

Q. Does that apply to all the property? A. There was 
not a good piece of property in it, except the one he lives 
on, in good repair. 

By Mr. Laughlin : 

Q. Was there any other reason at that time, at the time you 
demanded the collaterals, to induce you to make a demand of 
Mr. Lancaster, other than the fact he was involved in the 


101 


Big Muddy Iron Company to an extent that you did not 
know ? A. That was the prime cause of insisting on getting 
these. I did not know how much he was into that thing. 

Re-direct Examination by Mr. Glover. 

Q. You say you insisted on having security given to you; 
why didn’t you take a larger mortgage on the homestead ? 
A. I had pretty hard trouble to get that one; his wife would 
not sign that one at all. 

Q. You had no trouble in getting a mortgage for more than 
the other property was worth ? A. I got all that was worth. 

Q. Bo you say that the homestead was worth only $2,000 ? 
A. Under the homestead law he had— 

Q. An acknowledged deed by the wife and husband would 
carry the homestead ? A. The wife would not sign the deed; 
she refused to sign the deed. 

Q. Bid you think this sufficient security to loan $20,000 
or $25,000 of money out of the establishment on? A. The 
money was already out, and I was taking what I could get. 

Q. Bid you know when it went out ? A. I knew when it 
went out. 

Q. You wanted to prefer the customers of the concern to 
the Big Muddy creditors ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Bidn’t you think the best way to protect them would 
be to prevent the property being misappropriated ? A. 
People get into things before they know it sometimes. 

Q. You were not going into it ? A. No, sir. 

Q. You were a partner ? .A. A man often gets into things, 
and to get even, gets worse and worse. 

Q. Bon’t you think you ought to have made your stand 
for the cu stomers when the money was first misappro¬ 
priated ? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion, and the commissioner sustains the objection.] 

Q. Bid you object when the money of the customers was 
drawn out for the private uses of the partners ? A. When 
the money was going out it appeared to me it was going in 
an investment that would be profitable, putting in $45,000 
in the Big Muddy Iron Company, I supposed it would be a 
profitable concern. 

Q. Was that the money of the firm ? A. That was the 
money belonging to the firm. 

Q. Bo you mean to say that $45,000 of the firm’s money 
was envested in the interprise of Mr. Lancaster? A. He 
took out $45,000. 




102 


Q. That was the customers’ money ? A. It originally 
was. 

Q. Did you object to it ? A. No, I had no reason to. 
Mr. Lancaster was worth a great deal of money and he could 
do as he pleased. 

Q. He could do as he pleased with the customers’ money ? 
A. It was money there; it was to his credit at that time. 

Q. Whose money was it that was used in that way, the 
$45,000? A. The $45,000 when he went in, that was his 
money. 

Q. It must be evident that I am not asking you about 
that, when the money that belonged in your hands was 
drawn out to make the $25,000; did you object to that be¬ 
ing done ? A. I objected, but I thought it was best to let 
it go. We always thought the furnace would sell for enough 
to get it back. The panic of 1873 burst everything up. 

Q. You didn’t object ? A. Not seriously, because I thought 
it was going to a good place where we would get it back. 

Q. You thought it proper to use the customers' money 
where it would be successful ? A. I don’t know as Istojrped 
to think. 

Q. In what year did the firm make $10,000 ? A. It made 
$10,000 in 1878, I think. 

Q. What other year ? A. I can’t tell. 

Q. Can you swear they made as much in any other year ? 
A. In 1872, I think, we made $12,000. 

Q. What year did you make $6,000 ? A. That was a bad 
year, I think ; it was about 1876. 

Q. What year did you make $5,000 in ? A. I don’t know. 

Q. What year did you make $10,000 in, besides 1878 ? A. 

I don’t recollect of any. 

Q. What year did you make $8,000 in? A. There was 
one good year, a good while before I had an interest, in 1868 
or 1869. 

Q. We are only speaking of between 1874 and 1883. When 
the firm was accumulating from $4,000 to $5,000 per annum 
for Mr. Lancaster, what was he living on ? A. Living on 
his money. 

Q. That he drew out of the firm ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is he a married man ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Keeps house ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Has children ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many ? A. I don’t know. 

Q. Two or three ? A. I think I have seen more than that. 

Q. Could he live for less than $4,000 or $5,000 a year ? 
A. I don’t think so. 


103 


Q. How did lie accumulate profits enough to pay off in 
that business $20,000 or $25,000 ? A. Up to the time he was 
made Surveyor of the Port, I only had a third interest in the 
profits. 

Q. You told me when I first asked you that you divided 
equally. A. We do. 

Q. I understood for the whole time. A. I went in with a 
fourth interest, and had a third up to the time he was made 
Surveyor of the Port. 

Q. You had a fourth up to what time % A. That prob¬ 
ably lasted until 1874 or 1875. 

Q. You had a third up to what time ? A. Up to the 1st 
of January, 1886. During the year 1886 I have taken half 
and he has taken half. 

Q. During 1874 you had one-third ? A. Yes, sir ; I think 
that was about the year. 

Q. Did I understand you to say the expenses of the busi¬ 
ness came out of this $6,000, $8,000, or $10,000, as the case 
might be? A. Yo ; that was the net profit. 

Q. That is what would be turned over to each partner, his 
share of it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then when the firm made $10,000 a year, Mr. Lancas¬ 
ter would make $6,666, wouldn’t he ; and when it made 
$12,000 he would make $8,000 ; and when $6,000 he would 
make $4,000? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Will your books show what he drew out in this time 
of these profits % A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did he draw out for living expenses during the 
year? A. I don’t know. 

Q. You could not say about that ? A. No, sir. 

Q. You say there was hardly a good piece of property in 
this lot; did you say that, except his homestead % A. That 
on Eighth street, between Carr and Biddle, is on a hill eight 
or ten feet high, and the improvements on all of it are poor. 

Q. It was not very good security for the mortgage ? A. 
The ground is there but it is not productive property. 

Q. You say the income was merely nominal % A. That if 
he had as much money in cash as that would bring he could 
invest it a great deal better. 

Q. Well, would the property bring the amount of money 
put on it % A. Along about that. 

Q. Probably bring as much as $25,000 ? A. I hardly 
think it would. 

Q. About $20,000 ? A. About $20,000. 

Q. At one time he was indebted to the firm $25,000 \ A. 
I think so. 


104 


Q. There was $5,000 of the firm’s money you had no col¬ 
lateral for then ? A. I was good for that; I was liable for 
the whole of it if he didn’t make it good. 

Q. Did yon have an interest in the purposes for which the 
mone<- was used ? A. Not at all. 

Q. You say the $10,000 was collected in 1881? A. That 
is my recollection. 

Q. From the Joliet Steel works ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did that go to Mr. Lancaster directly or did he divide 
with some one ? A. I think it went to him, I think he paid 
Mr. Bowman- 

Q. I asked you whether the fee came out of that ? A. I 
w T ent to Mr. Lackland, Mr. Lancaster was sick at the time, 
and he gave me a check for $10,000 less one cent; I forget 
whether Mr. Lancaster paid Mr. Bowman that sum or he got 
it from the other side. 

Q. Is it not a fact that Mr. Bowman had a contingent fee 
of one-fourth or one-third ? A. I don’t know the particu¬ 
lars. 

Q. That was before the mortgages were canceled on the 
record? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did that $10,000 go into the firm ? A. Yes, sir, went 
in the same pocket. We only had one place to put money. 

Q. It went to reimburse customers who up to that time had 
not been reimbursed ? A. They would always get the money 
when they asked for it; I never put oft* a single man. 

Q. And you mean they had not asked for it? A. They 
had not asked for it. 

Q. For the $10,000 the customers have not asked for it? 
A. Everybody got the money who asked for it. 

Q. The $10,000 of customers had not asked for the money 
in your hands that belonged to them. You could not have 
paid them if they had? A. I could have paid at any time. 

Q. Why didn’t you make a credit on the mortgage for the 
$10,000, or cancel some of them to the extent of $10,000 ? 
A. It was not necessary; there was no occasion requiring it. 

Q. When the debt for which the thing is given, or the 
collateral is paid, it is generally surrendered ? A. When 
dealing with strangers; I was not dealing with strangers. 

Q. What was the motive in keeping the mortgages like 
blankets on the property ? A. I don’t know, unless I ask 
my attorneys. I asked my attorney. 

Q. He was Mr. Lancaster’s attorney? A. He was my at¬ 
torney. 

Q. He was Mr. Lancaster’s attorney you said? A. He 
was my attorney principally. He was counsel of the firm. 



105 


Q. And yon asked him about them, and he said you had 
better leave them there? A. Yes, sir. 

By Mr. Laugiilin. 

Q. Was Mr. Lancaster ever in the whiskey business ? A. 
No, ; sir. I forgot to say when you asked me about other 
business, that he was in the pork business once; he, and Jim 
Hardy in 1868. 

Q. He was not in that business after 1873 ? A. No; he 
lost a couple of thousand dollars and got out of it. 


R. B. Lancaster. 

H. D. Lancaster, of lawful age, being produced, sworn 
and examined, on the part of the defendant, deposes and 
says : 

Direct examination by John M. Glover, Esq., 

Q. You are the plaintiff in this case, are you ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Where were you born ? A. I was born in Ireland. 

Q. What part of Ireland ? A. County of Wexford. 

Q. How long did you live in that place ? A. Thirteen 
years. 

Q. Where did you go from there ? A. To this country. 

Q. What city ? A. St. Louis. 

Q. Have you lived here ever since ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What time did you live in St. Louis ? A. In 1850, is 
my recollection. 

Q. What official position in the machinery of the Demo¬ 
cratic party have you held, and when—I don’t mean offices; 
I mean the place of Committeeman. I will ask you in de¬ 
tail ; were you ever on the City Central Committee ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. When ? A. It was in the year 1870 that I was elected; 
Samuel T. Gflover and myself were elected members of the 
City Central Committee from the old Seventh Ward. 

Q. That was 1870 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did you hold it ? A. Until the following 
election. 

Q. A year ? A. It was one year then ; my recollection is 
that we were elected for one year. At that time, on the 22d 
of February in each year, they were elected by mass meet¬ 
ings in each ward and Samuel T. Glover and myself were 
elected for one year ; that is my recollection. 




106 


Q. Did you hold for only one year ? A. That is my 
recollection. 

Q. Were you ever at any other time a member of the City 
Central Committee ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you ever a member of any Congressional Com¬ 
mittee? A. No, sir; I was a member of the State Com¬ 
mittee. 

Q. Were you not a member of the Congressional Com¬ 
mittee at any time ? A. No, sir. 

Q. When were you on the State Committee ? A. I served 
four years on the State Committee, I believe. 

Q. When was that ? A. Up to the last State election. 

Q. From 1882 to 1886 ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. Were you at any other time on the State Committee ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you on the County Committee at any time ?. A. 
I was on the County Committee ; that is what I referred to 
awhile ago—that is, the City and County combined. 

Q. You had no service on the County Committee other 
than such as you have stated that you had on the City Com¬ 
mittee ? A. That was the same thing ; the city and the 
county were the same; they were combined ; it was one 
committee. 

Q. Is that a full account of the places that you have held 
on committees of the Democratic party ? A. Oh, I have 
been appointed on committees by Democrats several times. 

Q. I don’t mean special committees, but general commit¬ 
tees of the party ? A. That is all of general committees ; 
that is my recollection. 

Q. Did you collect money of Andrew J. Clabby when he 
was a candidate for clerk of the Criminal Court, in the city 
of St. Louis, at or about the year of 1878, for political pur¬ 
poses ? A. I don’t remember now whether I did or not. 

Q. Did Andrew J. Clabby give you a check for $150 in 
compliance with a request made by you for that amount of 
money at or about that time ? A. I cannot state whether 
he did or not; I don’t think he did; that is my recollection. 

Q. Do you mean to say that you don’t know ? A. I know 
that he never gave me any money. 

Q. Didn’t he give a check or order for $150 ? A. No, sir ; 

I don’t think he did. 

Q. Do you state that positively? A. It is my recollec¬ 
tion that I never got any check from him. 

Q. Will yon be positive on that point ? 

[Counsel for plaintiff objects.] 




107 


A. I have answered that question, I think, as near as I re¬ 
member. 

Q. Well, I don’t understand whether you say that you 
didn’t do it or that you have no recollection as to whether 
you did or not—which is it? A. I don’t remember the cir¬ 
cumstance of Mr. Clabby giving me a check for $150 ; that 
is what I mean to say. 

Q. Did he give you currency for $150 ? A. In answer to 
that question I will say that he gave me no money, either in 
money or check—to me ; whether he gave me money to be 
distributed for his interest is another question ; I don’t re¬ 
member whether he did or not; but forme, I say positively 
no. 

Q. You misapprehend the question ; the question was not 
directed as to whether you received it yourself, but whether 
you received $150 from him for political purposes at or 
about that time ? A. I don’t think I did ; I don’t remem¬ 
ber that I did. 

Q. Did you receive money from Phil Stock at or about 
that time? A. I don’t remember whether I did or not; 
my recollection is that I don’t think I did. 

Q. Did you receive money from Phil Zepp at or abdut 
that time for political purposes prior to his nomination on 
the Democratic ticket in 1878 ? A. I don’t remember it if I 
did. 

Q. Did you receive money from John Finn for political 
purposes at or about the same time, in connection with the 
same campaign ? A. I don’t think I did. 

Q. Don’t you know whether you did or not ? A. It is 
niv recollection that I did not. 

Q. Who were the candidates—nominees on the democratic 
ticket in 1878 at the same time that Clabby was nominated 
for clerk of the criminal court? A. I don’t know whether 
Mr. Clabby was nominated that time or not; I cannot re¬ 
member ; I don’t know who the candidates were. 

Q. You don’t know who they were in 1878 ? A. I do not; 
I could not name them now. 

Q. Mr. Lancaster, did you make up, prior to the nomina¬ 
tion in 1878, a list of assessments aggregating $1,750, com¬ 
posed of items which were to be demanded of each of the 
politicians I have named, and others, and collected by you 
for political purposes prior to the nominations in that year ? 
A. In 1878 ? 

Q. Yes, sir ? A. I think you have reference to 1876, have 
you not ? 


108 


Q. I possibly have ; did you do so in 1876 ? A. I did not 
myself ; it was done, though, by the committee and others 
who were called in to assist them in that matter- 

Q. [Interrupting.] Who were the others on the commit¬ 
tee ? A. [Continuing.] To defray the expenses of the judi¬ 
cial convention ; I remember that very well. 

Q. Who were the other members of the committee ? A. 
Members of the city committee that I referred to, with the 
members of the State committee in connection with the 
members of the State committee and the central committee 
of the city. 

Q. Was that prior to the nomination ? A. Yes, sir ; prior 
to the nomination of the judicial convention. 

Q. And that was in 1876 ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. Well, I am asking you now of assessments against Stock, 
Zepp, Finn, Clabby, all of them or either of them—not 
simply the judicial convention ? A. I don’t remember any¬ 
thing about that thing that you are now referring to—these 
names. 

Q. Either in 1876 or 1878 ? A. I don’t think so ; my 
answer is that I don’t remember being treasurer of but one 
organization. 

Q. What organization was that? A. Or one convention 
for the purpose of paying these expenses ; I was elected 
treasurer to receive this money and pay it out to the differ¬ 
ent wards for the actual expenses that were incurred in the 
election'of delegates to that convention. 

Q. Which organization was that? A. It was, I think, 
fifteen or sixteen or seventeen hundred dollars. 

Q. Which organization was that ? A. It was not an or¬ 
ganization. 

Q. You used the word organizations ; what did you mean 
by that ? A. Well, I mean by the parties coming together 
and consulting and agreeing to carry out that object and the 
mode of carrying out the election of delegates and nominate a 
judicial convention ; there was no organization. 

Q. Which convention was it ? A. It was the convention 
of 1876—judicial convention of 1876, I said. 

Q. Now, will you please answer my question ; you said 
you were a member of a committee for the purpose of col¬ 
lecting funds or disbursing them, and I asked you who the 
members of the committee were, and you didn’t answer fully. 
I would like well to know ? A. I said the members of the 
City Committee at that time, in conjunction with the mem¬ 
bers from this city on the State Committee. 



109 


Q. Well, I wan’t the names ? A. I could not give you all 
the names now ; Dan Kerwin and, I think, Tom Brady—I 
could not attempt to give the names of the committee at that 
date. 

Q. Was Ed. Butler one of them ? A. I am not certain 
whether Ed. Butler was a member of that committee or not. 

Q. Who appointed this committee ? A. This committee 
was elected by the convention. 

Q. I am talking about assessments prior to the nomina¬ 
tion, Mr. Lancaster? A. You were not asking me about 
assessments ; you asked who appointed this committee, and 
I say. that they were elected by the convention. 

Q. What committee, then, did collect money of Charles 
S. Hayden, if you did collect any ? A. I don’t know 
whether Mr. Hayden came directly himself or not,1but he 
paid his^ro rata share of the actual expenses of that judi¬ 
cial convention. 

Q. Did he pay it to you ? A. Well, I must have received 
it, because I was the treasurer appointed for that purpose. 

Q. Was not that before the nomination? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Well, then, that committee was not appointed by the 
convention, was it ? A. You asked me how was that com¬ 
mittee elected, referring to the city committee ? 

Q. You misunderstood me. A. I didn’t misunderstand 
you ; I answered the question as you asked it. 

Q. How was the collecting committee appointed ? A. 
There was no collecting committee, as you call it, to collect 
the money ; my recollection is that the members of the com¬ 
mittee, in conjunction with the members of the State com¬ 
mittee that had charge of that convention,that had authority 
to call it, made with others— 

[Counsel for defendant objects.] 

Witness (Continuing). If you will let me alone I will 
answer it straight. They met, with others, right in this 
building for the purpose of consulting and agreeing as to 
what was the best mode of calling that convention, and also 
for the purpose of finding the very best men to be supported 
for candidates of the Court of Appeals and the three circuit 
judges. 

Q. Did that body of gentlemen appoint a collecting com¬ 
mittee ? A. That committee—I don’t remember that there 
was any committee appointed. In answer to that question 
I will state exactly what I did in the matter and what oc¬ 
curred. 

Q. I prefer an answer to the question ? A. I cannot an- 





110 


swer it, except by a statement of the facts ; yon want to 
know what occurred and I am going to tell you. 

Q. I didn’t ask you that. I will ask you this : what did 
you do with the money that you collected from Hayden, if 
you collected any ? A. Let me answer that first question 
and then I will tell you exactly what was done with the 
money. 

Q. I prefer to guide the examination instead of having 
you guide it. I will get you to answer the last question 
then. [Question repeated.] A. I have not said that I col¬ 
lected any money from Hayden. 

Q. Did you collect any ? A. It is my recollection that I 
have not made that statement. 

Q. Did you ? A. I don’t know whether I did or not; I 
don’t tnow whether it was brought to me by him or others ; I 
didn’t collect it. 

Q. I believe you stated that you must have received it; 
did you not? A. I received it; yes, sir. 

Q. What did you do with it ? A. I paid it out, with 
other moneys received at the same time, to pay expenses of 
that primary in the different wards; there were Judges and 
clerks and polling places, and a hall to be paid for which 
that money was collected for. The actual amount was so 
much, and I received it all but $125, which I am out of yet. 

Q. You received it as treasurer ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Treasurer for whom and what ? A. As treasurer for 
the parties that met together for that purpose. 

Q. Did they have a president or chairman ? A. Now, I 
cannot remember whether there was a president or chairman 
or not. 

Q. Did you, at the same time, collect the money from Mr. 
Farish which came from R. A. Bakewell ? A. That is what 
I referred to—no, sir, I didn’t collect it. 

Q. You didn’t get any from Farish ? A. I didn’t collect 
it; Mr. Farish brought it to my office, and I never saw Judge 
Bakewell or Farish until Farish came there. 

Q. You received the money from Farish, did you ? A. I j 
received the moneys, certainly; there is no question about 
that; there is no secret about it, either. 

Q. How much was it ? A. Farish paid $250; that is my 
recollection. 

Q. How much did Hayden pay ? A. I think Hayden paid 
$275; that was the actual pro rata share of the six. 

Q. Did you collect any money from J. Fred Thornton on 
account of Judge Lindley, at or about that time ? A. I don’t 
think I did, from him. 



Ill 


Q. Did you receive any from him ? A. I did, I have no 
doubt; I was told that he paid it—that he advanced it to 
Judge Lindley to pay this expense. 

Q. Did you personally receive a check from J. Fred Thorn¬ 
ton on behalf of Judge Lindley ? A. I don't think I did. 

Q. Can you state with any more .positivenesS, than to say 
you don’t think you did ? A. No, I don’t think I did ; I 
don’t remember of seeing J. Fred. Thornton. 

Q. AY ill you say that you did not receive $250, or a sum 
about that amount, from J. Fred. Thornton, on account of 
an assessment made against Judge Lindley as candidate for 
judge of the circuit court before the nomination ? A. Yes, 
sir ; I say that I don’t remember whether I received it from 
him or not ; my recollection is that I did not. 

Q. From whom did you receive it then ? A. I cannot say. 

Q. But you received the money ? A. I have no doubt I 
received the money from somebody, but whether from him 
or not I don’t remember, and my recollection is that I did 
not, from the fact- 

Q. AA'hat other candidates did you receive money from in 
regard to the same transaction ? A. From Judge Lewis. 
Judge Lewis came to my office himself and paid me $175 in 
place of $275, and I advanced the balance myself. 

Q. AA T ho else ? A. From all six of them. I received 
money from all six, that is the amounts that they paid. 

Q. AA r ho were the six? A. Judges Lewis, Hayden and 
Bakewell. 

Q. That is three? A. I don’t say that I received it from 
them, but it was paid for them. Lindley, Boyle and Thayer 
were the candidates. 

Q. You received money from all of them, did you ? A. 
AYell, I have answered that question, Mr. Glover. I have 
stated that I have received the money ; whether they paid 
it personally or not I am not able to state, but I received it 
as treasurer for that purpose. 

Q. As treasurer of that body of men, I suppose you turned 
that money in to that body of men, didn’t you? A. No, 
sir. 

Q. What did you do with it ? A. I paid it out to some¬ 
body that represented the ward—either the committeemen 
or somebody else, to pay the expenses of the delegates, as 
that question was raised by myself; that the money must 
be- collected rather than have the delegates pay it. It was 
charged prior to that time that the delegates went to con¬ 
ventions and had to pay—that was the fact that they had 



*112 


to pay the expenses of their election, which was from $125, 
or it may be $150, from each ward, and I contended that it 
was wrong, that it gave those men a license to go to candi¬ 
dates and say to them: ‘‘Here, I will vote for yon if you 
pay me my money back that I have paid out to come to this 
convention.” I opposed that idea, and went on the theory 
of collecting it from Democrats, or from candidates, so as 
to stop that thing. 

Q. That is rather an extended answer. A. That is the 
fact. 

Q. Up to that time delegates had paid their own expenses ?' 
A. They did ; they were assessed by the committeemen in 
each ward the amount of the expenses, and that is what I 
wanted to stop as far as I was concerned, and it has been the 
custom ever since, I believe, to collect money from the can¬ 
didates ; the committee has adopted that rule. 

Q. I understand you to say that you inaugurated a sys¬ 
tem of getting a body of men together and deciding how 
much candidates would pay, and assessing them for it ? A. 
No, sir ; I didn’t get them together at all. 

Q. You acted with them? A. I was invited to consult 
the best interests of the democratic party at that time, and 
I came and gave my views in the matter on that question, 
and that was the result. 

Q. Who fixed the amount to be paid by each one of these 
candidates? A. The committee. 

Q. This committee of men ? A. No, sir ; the city com¬ 
mittee. 

Q. No, sir ; I mean that were to be paid by that body ? 
A. I am answering your question ; I say the city committee. 

Q. Were they all members ? A. I think they were. 

Q. All members of that organization? A. They were 
called in for that purpose, for consultation. 

Q. Were they all members ? A. Members of what ? 

Q. Of this secret body ? A. It was not a secret body. 

Q. Did they have open sessions ? A. Well, the republi¬ 
cans were not invited in or candidates for office that were 
not looked upon as competent to fill the positions—they 
were not invited. \ 

Q. Were they open sessions ? A. They were open sessions 
as far as—as open as this is. 

Q. Did they have them in the daytime ? A. Yes, sir; as 
a general thing, I believe those meetings were held in the 
afternoon, if I remember right. 

Q. Anybody could come in who wanted to ? A. It was 


113 


right down stairs, in the room right below here that these 
meetings were had. 

Q. In whose office? A. Judge Laughlin’s office, as Judge 
Laughlin had the authority to call that convention ; he was 
a member of the State committee at that time. 

Q. Was he the chairman ? A. He was—I didn’t say he 
was the chairman ; no, sir. 

Q. Was he chairman ? A. I didn’t say he was. 

Q. Didn’t you say so just now ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you say Judge Laughlin was chairman ? A. No, 
sir ; I didn’t say that. 

Q. Who was chairman ? A. I don’t know. 

Q. You say he was a member of the State committee? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. He had authority to call this body together ? A. Yes, 
sir ; I think he had authority to call this convention, and 
he called this body of men together—this central committee, 
and it was for the purpose of consultation ; to know what 
was the best interest of the party, and when this convention 
should be held, and whether it should be a separate judicial 
convention outside of a political convention, and it was 
agreed to make it a separate political convention, and you 
were a candidate yourself at that time, in the old 7th ward, 
as a delegate, I believe, and I was too, and you were not 
elected, and I was. 

Q. I don’t remember that, but that is not the question 
under inquiry? A. I simply state that because it has been 
stated I never was elected to anything. 

Q. That is the one particular instance, is it not ? A. No, 
sir ; there are several other cases. 

Q. Apart from that, and following the line of inquiry, do 
I understand you to say that this was a meeting officially 
called by Mr. Laughlin ? A. I do—do you, I say—that is, 
if you understand what I say. 

Q. Well, is it a part of the duties of an official of that 
kind to call meetings, and assess candidates prior to the 
nomination of the Democratic party in this city ? A. They 
were not assessed. 

Q. Who told them how much they were to pay ? A. It 
was some of those members. 

Q. Some of the members ? A. Some of the parties who 
were there in interest. 

Q. The amount was fixed in the meeting ? A. The amount 
was fixed by the central committee—the actual cost of that 


114 


primary, and the question was how that money should be 
raised, and it was raised in that way. 

Q. This body of men supported a set of delegates, did 
they not, for the convention ?A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who paid the assessment, was there any opposition to 
the slate ? A. There was quite a number of parties talked 
of and who would like to be judges at that time, if I re¬ 
member. 

Q. Was this a regular meeting of the Central Committee ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Was that the place of meeting of the Central Com¬ 
mittee ? A. I don’t know where they met then. 

Q. I think you know that that was not the place of meet¬ 
ing of the Central Committee, do you not ? A. Well, I don’t 
know whether they had any special place to meet in. 

Q. Was that the regular meeting-place of the Central 
Committee ? A. It wouldn’t make any difference whether 
it was there or in any other place, as long as they agreed to 
call the convention that way. 

Q. Was that the regular meeting-place of the Central 
Committee? A. I can’t say whether it was or not ; I only 
say that the committee fixed the amount of the expense. 

Q. What members of the committee fixed it ? A. Well, 
I can’t answer that question. 

Q. What members of the committee were there ? A. I 
think nearly all of them came to attend this meeting. 

Q. Were you a member of that committee ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Was Laughlin? A. Laughlin was a member of the 
State Committee, that had authority to call this convention 
the judicial convention, and he called these parties with him 
to consult. I have answered that question half a dozen times 
already. 

Q. Who else was there that did ’ not belong to the City 
Central Committee ? A. I can’t answer that question. 

Q. Anybody besides you ? A. I think there was. 

Q. Ed Butler ? A. He may have been. 

Q. Frank Turner ? A. No, sir ; I didn’t know Frank Tur¬ 
ner at that time. 

Q. This was in 1876, was it? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What other candidates were assessed at that meeting ? 
A. There were no other candidates. 

Q. Only the members of the judiciary; was anybody nom¬ 
inated who did not pay the assessment of this organization ? 
A. I can’t answer that question the way it is put; the or¬ 
ganization did not assess anybody as an organization ; I 



115 


don't say it was an organization, nor I don’t want to be mis¬ 
understood in the matter. It was not an organization. 
There w T as no organization; they were called in as committee¬ 
men and citizens to consult in the best interests of the party 
and what w T as best to do. 

Q. Who w r ere they ?, A. I don’t know who was there. 

Q. Can’t you remember any other officer except the treas¬ 
urer ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Now, I understand you to say that that body of men 
fixed the amount that each was to pay and notified them— 
wasn’t that so; and they did pay? A. No, sir; they were 
notified of the facts. 

Q. What facts ? A. That it required that much money to 
pay the actual expenses of the primary. 

Q. [Interrupting.] You said you were treasurer? A. 
[Interrupting.] Wait until I answer the question. The 
question was put to them, as it w r as discussed by the mem¬ 
bers of the committee, to know whether a primary meeting 
should be held or whether a mass meeting should be held for 
the purpose, and they were called in and consulted, and those 
that were looked on as the best candidates for those posi¬ 
tions; and after a consultation it was agreed to have a prim¬ 
ary convention, which cost that amount. 

Q. Who w as it that made the selection of the best men to 
be judges ? A. Those that were then in consultation. 

Q. How many of them w r ere there ? A. How many of 
who ? 

Q.. That w T ere in consultation, of course? A. I couldn’t 
tell you the number present. 

Q. Ten ? A. Yes, sir ; I think there were more than ten. 

Q. Twenty ? A. I don’t know that twenty ever met to¬ 
gether, or as many as that. 

Q. How many lawyers were there there ? A. I couldn’t 
answer w hether there wras more than one lawryer or not. 

Q. Well, think a minute, and see if you can recollect how 
w r ell the bar was represented there? A. I think the bar was 
pretty well represented. 

Q. By whom ? A. By Judge Lauglilin. 

Q. Anybody else ? A. I can’t say ; I know that the Judge 
was there, because he was there, as I stated before. 

Q. Well, now T , Ed. Butler w T as there, I believe, was he not ? 
By the w ay, what relation are you to Butler ? A. I am not 
a "brother-in.law. 

Q. Connection by marriage ? A. No, sir. 

Q. None whatever ? A. None whatever. 


l 


116 


Q. What relation are you ? A. None to Ed. Butler. 

Q. His wife ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What relation are you to his wife ? A. She is a cousin 
of mine. 

Q. First cousin ? A. Yes, sir ; first cousin. 

Q. Well, Ed. was there, wasn’t he ? A. I can’t say 
whether he was or not. 

Q. Didn’t you say just now he was there to select the best 
men for judges ? A. If he was, he was acting in that ca¬ 
pacity. 

Q. Wasn’t Frank Turner there ? A. lam satisfied that 
Frank Turner wasn’t there ; I didn’t know Frank Turner 
at that time ; I never knew him until he went in convention 
in opposition to Judge Jones ; that was the first time I ever 
met him. 

Q. What year was that ? A. I think that was in 1878. 

Q. Now this body of men, as I understand it, not exceed¬ 
ing 20 at any one meeting—by the way ; how many mem¬ 
bers were there in the central committee at that time—28 
wards, were they not ? A. No, I reckon not. 

Q. How many were there ? A. Let me see, in 1876 there 
were 13 wards. 

Q. Who were the members of the city central committee 
at that time ? A. As I said before I could not name them 
now. 

Q. Can you name a single member of the city central com¬ 
mittee who was there ? A. I did name some. 

Q. I don’t remember, who was it ? A. My recollection is 
that Dan Kerwin was a member. 

Q. Yes, that is one ? A. I have named two or three be¬ 
fore. I think Tom Brady was a member. 

Q. That is two, I believe you did name him ; anybody 
else? A. I don’t know whether Ed. Butler was a member 
of the city central committee that year or not ; he was a 
member of the central committee about that time, but 
whether he was a member that year or not I am not positive; 
I now believe he was ; I believe that committee held over 
after the election of Arthur Barrett and Britton ; I think it 
was the same committee. 

Q. Were they candidates for the primaries ? A. I expect 
they were ; I don’t know whether they were or not. 

Q. Who paid the expenses of their delegates ? A. That 
I don’tknoAv. 

Q. This body of gentlemen didn’t do that, did they ? A. 

No, I think not. 


117 


Q. Whom did you support for governor in 1880 ? A. I 
supported Thomas T. Crittenden. 

Q. Were you a member of the Crittenden organization ? 
A. No, sir ; there was no organization, as you have nick¬ 
named it, there was none. 

Q. As I have nicknamed it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What do you mean by that? A. I mean what I say. 

Q. How did I nickname it ? A. You connected it with 
the Hark Lantern Party, as I understand it. 

Q. Was that the beginning of the nickname? A. No, 
sir : I think the beginning of the nickname was in 1876. 

Q. How did it begin ? A. It was nicknamed by Joe Mc- 
Cullagh for his amusement—for his pleasure at that time, 
as I understand it. 

Q. What did he nickname the Hark Lantern organiza¬ 
tion ? A. There was an organization in 1875 that supported 
Arthur Barrett for mayor, and James H. Brotton for mayor 
after Barrett died ; that was nicknamed the Hark Lantern 
party, of which I was not chief. 

Q. Were you a member ? A. I never was chief of the or¬ 
ganization, as called. 

Q. Were you a member ? A. I was, sir. 

Q. That was in 1875, was it ? A. That was in 1875 up to 
1876—the summer of 1876, and that organization never met 
afterwards as an organization ; it was gotten up especially 
in the interest of Barrett. There was another organization 
at the same time gotten up in the interest of Overstolz ; it 
was a fight between the friends of Barrett and Overstolz as 
to who would get the Hemocratic nomination for mayor. 

Q. Why was that called the Hark Lantern organization ? 
A. Because it was successful in the nominating of its friends 
and Bemocrats, and the parties that were disappointed felt 
bad, and especially the Missouri Republican at that time ; 
as the organization was not in the interest of their candi¬ 
date. 

Q. Who was their candidate ? A. Overstolz. 

Q. Hid you collect money from Barrett for political pur¬ 
poses ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Never? A. No, sir. 

Q. Not a cent ? A. No, sir. 

Q. At no time ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Never received any? A. No, sir. 

Q. As treasurer or as an individual ? A. I paid out money 
for him as his agent. 

Q. AIL how much? A. On his orders—I won’t say that 


118 


I did it; I will say that Lancaster and Tiernari did it— 
Tiernan did it principally. 

Q. How much on his orders ? A. From first to last about 
$3,600. It wasfclaimed at the time that his election cost 
him $50,000 ; $25,000 was the lowest estimate by parties who 
didn’t know anything about it. 

Q. You disbursed that as his agent ? A. As his real estate 
agent. 

Q. To whom did you disburse it ? A. To parties for ex¬ 
penses. For instance to Billy Baggot ; I paid him money 
for running errands for Barrett—as messenger ; he was a 
member of that organization afterwards—that is of that 
caucus, you may call it ; it was not an organization, and I 
paid it out to others in the same way, although it was not 
paid to him (Baggott) for expenses ; it was paid to him for 
his services. Other moneys were paid out for expenses. 

Q. Well, did you make a claim against the Barrett estate ?' 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Hid you claim money from Barrett while he lived ? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Money that you had spent, over and above what you 
received, in excess of what you received ? A. No, sir ; 1 
spent some seven or eight hundred dollars myself in that 
campaign out of my own pocket; I paid all the expenses of 
my own ward for Barrett, and I never charged him one dol¬ 
lar for what I did in the way of expenses—in the way of 
electioneering, and you know how it is done ; I expect "you 
know last year what it cost. 

Q. I am learning. That was the Hark Lantern Organiza¬ 
tion, was it? A. It was nicknamed the Hark Lantern Or¬ 
ganization. 

Q. By both the Globe and the Republican ? A. At that 
time; yes, sir. 

Q. And you were a member ? A. \ r es, sir. 

Q. I ask you again whether you were a member of the 
Crittenden organization of 1880 ? A. I was a member—I 
wasn’t a member of an organization; there was none, except 
a caucus that was called first in the room of Crittenden in 
the Laclede Hotel, in the spring of 1880. Robert E. Carr, 
Walter Carr, Colonel Cabell and myself, and probably five 
or six others met in Col. Crittenden’s room, one night when 
he came here—in fact we were invited there, and there was 
an organization started in his interest, as you call it. 

Q. Well, it enlarged, did it not ? A. It did. 

Q. I suppose you met subsequently in other meetings that 


119 


were held, did you not? A. Well, we met several times 
after that ; I did not, though, meet so often ; I became sick 
very soon after this ; I had a case of inflammatory rheu¬ 
matism that laid me up for six weeks in my house, nearly 
all the time. 

Q. Mr. Lancaster, who disbursed the funds of that or¬ 
ganization ? A. I couldn’t tell you that. 

Q. Don’t you know that Mr. E. C. Cabell did it ? A. I 
couldn’t tell you that because I wasn’t here. 

Q. Were you present when he was examined under oath 
on that proposition? A. Where ? 

Q. About disbursing funds in the Gundecker suit ? A. 
When you ask me if I know, I say no, I don’t know it. I 
never saw him disburse any money; I never saw a dollar 
disbursed in that campaign. I left here on the 30th of June, 
1880, for Hot Springs and remained there until the 13th of 
August of the same year, and during that time the conven¬ 
tions were held, and, as I say, when you ask me if Cabell or 
anybody else disbursed money, I don’t know. I didn’t see 
it. I never saw a dollar of any money contributed, and un¬ 
less I know it, I am not going to say I did. 

Q. Do you know E. C. Cabell ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What were your personal relations with him ? A. 
Very friendly indeed. 

Q. To what extent had the organization proceeded when 
you left here for Hot Springs ; had they elected a treasurer 
at that time? A. No, sir. 

Q. Had not ? A. No sir, they had not; the organization, 
and what was know as the Crittenden organization, was be¬ 
ing organized with John H. Maxon as chairman ; I don’t 
remember who was secretary, if there was any, but he pre¬ 
sided on one or two occasions on which I met with the friends 
of Crittenden, and the idea or object was to discuss his in¬ 
terest, etc. 

Q. What office did you hold in the caucus ? A. None. 

Q. Do you know Thomas A. Russell ? A. I do. 

Q. Let ine ask you whether the Court of Appeals’ conven¬ 
tion, that was held in 1880, was not made up of a portion of 
the delegates elected to the State convention, which was to 
nominate a governor ? A. I can only answer that by hear¬ 
say ; I don’t remember of seeing the call for a convention; 
as I was not here at the election of delegates to either con¬ 
vention I cannot positively state ; I cannot state except from 
hearsay, and I don’t propose to testify from hearsay. 


120 


Q. Was Ed. Butler a member of the Crittenden caucus ? 
A. Yes, sir, Butler was a supporter of Crittenden. 

Q. Was E. C. Cabell a member of it? A. He was a sup¬ 
porter of Crittenden. 

Q. Was he a member of the caucus? A. Yes, sir; he 
has met with them in my presence. 

Q. Was Frank D. Turner? A. I don’t remember of see¬ 
ing Frank Turner in any caucus. I know he was not at the 
hotel in Crittenden’s room when we were there, I am sure 
he was not. 

Q. Was Daniel Kerwin ? A. I don’t remember whether 
he was or not. 

Q. Hid you have a conversation with Thomas A. Bussell 
in regard to his nomination for the judge of the Court of 
Appeals at or about that time, in 1880 ? A. I did. 

Q. What was the conversation ? A. I had two or three 
conversations with Bussell. 

Q. Well, give them where money matters were mentioned ? 
A. The first one was when he came to my house, and I was 
sick, if I remember, and told me that lie was a candidate 
for that office ; he and I live in the same ward, and I felt 
friendly towards him, and he wanted me to support him; 
as I was sick I could not support anybody, as far as that 
was concerned, for I was not able to do anything. But a 
day or so before I left for Hot Springs I saw Mr. Bussell on 
the street and I told him I was going away, and I also told 
him that Crittenden’s friends were at work here in his in¬ 
terest, and I told him, if I remember right, that it was re¬ 
ported that he (Bussell) was on the other side ; and he took 
me up in his buggy—his testimony is correct as far as that 
is concerned—to know the condition of things, to know 
what the amount of the primary would be and all that, and 
I told him that I could not tell; that if the committee would 
call the election of delegates as they did two years previous 
that the expenses would be about the same—that it would 
be in the neighborhood of fifteen or sixteen hundred dollars. 

Q. For each candidate ? A. Yo, sir; the whole expense. 

Q. For the man who got the nomination ? A. The whole 
expense of the primaries. 

Q. Hid you suggest to him that he would have to pay $1,- 
500 ? A. Yo, sir, I didn’t suggest that he pay anything; 
he asked the question, that was all, and I answered it in 
just that way, that if it was called as it was before that that 
would be the amount. It is not necessary, I suppose, to 
give his answer as to what he thought about it ? 


121 


Q. You mentioned $1,500 to him then, did you? A. I 
did; I told him that that was the expense of the previous 
convention, that was held two years before; he complained; 
he said that was pretty rough on the candidate to have to 
pay all the expense—that six of them paid it two years ago, 
and I told him yes, that that was the condition of things ; 
I knew what I was talking about, for I was an actor in it. 

Q. W as the Crittenden organization in full blast then ? 
A. No, I don’t think it was; this was the last part of June, 
and my recollection is that the convention was held on the 
21st day of July, following, nearly a month after I saw Mr. 
Russell. 

Q. Were you present when Mr. Russell gave his testi¬ 
mony in the G-undecker suit ? A. I was not. 

Q. Who did you finally support for Judge of the Court of 
the Court of Appeals ? A. When ? 

Q. At the time that Wickham was nominated ? A. I 
didn’t support anybody. I was not here. I was in Hot 
Springs, as I said before, during all that time, from the 30th 
of June to the 13th of August. 

Q. Did you introduce that conversation with Russell on 
the street by asking him “ You want to see me ? ” A. No, 
sir; unless it was as a joke; he and I were friendly; I might 
have said, “I want to see you, I am going away/’ and if I 
remember correctly, that is what I said to him : “I cannot 
do you any good; I am going away, and I will tell you what 
I know.” He knew I was supporting Crittenden, and I was 
friendly to him, and I was giving him information that was 
friendly to his interest. 

Q. Did you take him down to your office ? A. No, sir ; 
he took me up to my office, for I was hardly able to walk ; 
I met him; I went down to get lunch or I may have been over 
to the Laclede Hotel, and I was hardly able to walk on ac¬ 
count of rheumatism, and he took me in his buggy and car¬ 
ried me up to my office, and during the ride we had that 
conversation. 

Q. You went into the office ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he go in with you ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Stopped in the door ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you tell him those expenses amounted to $1,500 ? 
A. No, sir ; I did not tell him that his expenses amounted 
to anything ; I answered that question very positive and dis¬ 
tinct, because I remember it just as well as I remember that 
I am sitting here now. I told him that if the committee 


122 


would call a primary election, and tlie same rule existed as 
two or three years previous, that it would be about $1,500. 

Q. Did you see any of the other candidates at that time ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. How long after that did you leave town ? A. Two or 
three days ; I left on the 30th ; this was probably two or 
three days before I left. 

Q. Did you leate on account of the hay fever? A. No, 
sir ; I said I was crippled with rheumatism ; I did not go to 
Hot Springs for hay fever. I did not see Judge Wickham; 
I did not see A. K. Taylor ; I did not see Judge Barclay ; 
I did not know those gentlemen were candidates. 

Q. What did you say to them about the strength of the 
organization ? A. Say to whom ? 

Q. To Mr. Russell ? A. I do not think I told him any¬ 
thing about the strength of the organization ; I told him 
that Crittenden’s friends were in caucus, and if the same 
delegates to the convention would nominate the Judge of 
the Court of Appeals, why he had better be looking after 
Crittenden’s friends. The fact is, I wanted Crittenden 
nominated for Governor, as I believed him to be the best 
man ; he was a Union man during the war, and I wanted 
some Union man elected to the offices of the State. 

Q. Now, if $1,500 was the total cost of electing delegates 
throughout the city, and the same delegates were elected, 
which was the case, as I understand it, to the Court of Ap¬ 
peals convention that were elected to the State convention, 
then the separate expenses of a candidate for the judge of 
the Court of Appeals would not be as much as $1,500, would 
it ? A. I cannot answer that question. 

Q. Well, did not the Crittenden organization, of which 
you which were a member, receive a corruption fund of $6,- 
000. A. I do not know whether they did or not. A. As I 
said before, I never saw it, I never saw a dollar of it, either 
paid in or paid out. 

Q. Did not they receive $2,000 from John F. Wickham ? 
A. I do not know whether they did or not. 

Q. What did Russell tell you in this conversation A. I 
did not see John F. Wickham in that connection. 

Q. Where was Cabell’s office at that time? A. I do not 
know that he had any office. 

Q. In your office most of the time, was he ? A. He came 
in there occasionally. 

Q. Most of the time, was he not ? A. I say he came oc¬ 
casionally to my office as a friend. 


123 


Q. He was there most of the time, was he not ? A. Most 
of the time ? I do not understand what von mean by ‘ ‘most 
of the time.” 

Q. Was he not in your office most of the time ? A. Not 
that I know of. 

Q. You nominated him for State Senator. I believe he 
was State Senator at this time, was he not % He was nomin¬ 
ated in 1878, I believe, I ask you if he was not State Senator 
at this time? A. In 1876. 

Q. In 1880 was he not a State Senator, who had been 
elected in 1878 ? A. Let me see ; in 1877 Cabell was elected 
as State Senator for a term of four years ; yes, sir. 

Q. Then he was State Senator in 1880, was he not ? A. 
He was a State Senator in 1880 ; yes, sir. I done all I could 
to elect Cabell in opposition to you in 1877, as he was a 
Vest man. 

Q. You did all you could to nominate him, too ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Ho you know Ashley Cabell ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. A relation of E. C. Cabell % A. He calls him his 
father. 

Q. He is his son, is he not, as far as you know ? A. I 
suppose he is ; so he understands it. 

Q. What other moneys did that organization receive \ 
A. What organization do you refer to ? 

Q. The Crittenden organization, so called. A. I have told 
you two or three times that I do not know of one dollar ; 
that I never saw one dollar of any fund ; of a fund that you 
refer to, I believe I have answered that three or four times. 

Q. Who was treasurer of that organization ? A. I don’t 
know. 

Q. Who was chairman % A. John H. Maxon was chair¬ 
man of a caucus that I attended two or three times before 
I went to Hot Springs. 

Q. How soon did you come back to the city after this con¬ 
versation with Russell ? A. Well, now, Mr. Commissioner, 
I have answered that question, I think, three or four times 
in the course of this examination ; if I am going to be asked 
to repeat and repeat, I am perfectly satisfied, but- 

Q. Well, I don’t mean to ask you to repeat. A. Why, 

I have stated the 13th of August three or four times. I 
now say that I came back on the 13th of August, and I left 
here on the 30th of June ; I will repeat that again for your 
information. 

Q. Then you were absent about thirteen or fourteen days, 



124 


were yon not ? A. Well, I should say it was a little more 
than that, it was about six weeks. 

Q. I thought you said you left the 30th of June and came 
back the 13th of August ? A. I did ; I stated that seven or 
eight times. 

Q. Now, when was the convention held ? A. I have 
already repeated that, and will do it again for your satis¬ 
faction. 

Q. Thank you. A. The election of delegates was held on 
the 17th. I got this from the newspapers—held on the 17th 
of July ; the convention was held on the 21st of July in Jef¬ 
ferson city ; I was at the same time at Hot Springs ; I was 
not there during the primary or the convention. 

Q. What other money have you collected from candidates 
for public office prior to the nomination ? A. Do you mean 
Crittenden ? 

Q. I mean anybody ? A. I have not said that I collected 
any money in this connection. 

Q. I am asking you whether you did collect any ? A. No, 
sir ; I did not. 

Q. You never collected any money from John Finn ? A. 
No, sir ; according to my recollection, I never did. 

Q. Did you from Phil. Zepp ? A. I don’t remember of 
collecting any money from Phil. Zepp. 

Q. Did you from Andrew J. Clabby ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Didn’t you take a check from Clabby and give it to 
Ed. Butler, and is not the check in existence with both of 
your signatures on it, and have you not seen it? A. No, 
sir ; I have never seen it. If I have collected any money 
in that way it was not for myself, but it was to" pay the 
legitimate expenses of the campaign. I have subscribed a 
good many times for the same purpose. 

Q. I am asking you what you collected in the sense of 
what you received, either for yourself or anybody else ? 
A. I never collected one dollar for myself for any political 
purpose or for my influence in any shape, manner or form. 
On the contrary I have subscribed on all occasions since 
1865 ; I have taken an active part in the democratic party 
and there has not been a year from that day to this that I 
have not subscribed in its interest; that is in the election 
years, I refer to. 

Q. You were a surety on the bond of John Busby, were 
you not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q, Of the firm of Curran & Busby ? A. I don’t know any 
such firm. 


125 


Q. What was the firm ? A. John Busby. 

Q. John Busby alone ; you qualified as surety and signed 
a bond for him, I believe ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How much ? A. I qualified for $10,000, if I remember 
rightly. 

Q. You signed a bond for how much ? A. For $10,000. 

Q. Did you possess that amount of real estate at that 
time ? A. I thought I did. 

Q. You thought you did ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was done in your name, was it not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did the Government recover a judgment against you 
on account of that bond \ A. The Government recovered a 
judgment against me and others on account of that bond. 

Q. For how much ? A. It was for double the amount of 
what they proved to have been stolen at that time, the only * 
time I was on it, from August, 1874' and along in Septem¬ 
ber, the same year. 

Q. When that judgment was recovered what had become 
of the property that you had when you qualified ? A. A 
good deal of it had went to pay my debts. 

Q. Who held it ? A. It was held as collateral security 
for money borrowed to pay my legitimate debts ; some of it 
was—well- 

Q. Held as collateral security by whom ? A. Well, I will 
have to explain so as to have it understood. 

Q. No-A. (interrupting.) It was held by the banks 

and by Joseph H. Tiernan, of the firm of Lancaster & Tier- 
nan, for moneys advanced by the firm to me to pay obliga¬ 
tions of the Big Muddy Iron Company, on which I paid out 
102,000 and odd dollars as stockholder and endorser. 

Q. Who held the property as collateral security ? A. I 
said the banks that I raised money from, and Tiernan. of 
the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan. 

Q. What relation are you to P. D. Keating ? A. He is a 
brother-in-law of mine. 

Q. What relation was Killian ? A. Yes, he is a daisy. 

Q. Did he marry your sister % A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you marry his ? A. He married Keating’s sister 
some 19 or 20 years ago. 

Q. That judgment was about the third of May, 1876, was it 
not ? A. I think it was in 1876 some time. 

Q. And the bond was dated when % A. I remember very 
well the date of the bond, as I had occasion to inquire into 
it at the time ; it cost me a good many dollars as well as 



126 


sleepless niglits ; it was dated in August, 1874, if I remem¬ 
ber right. 

Q. Now, how soon after you went on the bond did you 
learn that there was a dangerous liability there? A. I 
think that it was not any more than thirty days ; I think 
it was about thirty days after I signed that bond that I had 
my office right down stairs in this building, 309 Pine street, 
and Mr. Billy McKee, who was then well known, was on the 
corner of Fourth street, and I met him on Pine street one 
day ; he was in the habit of coming down to this corner 
here, where they sold soda water, etc., and he invited me to 
partake of some of it, and during that time he suggested, 
or asked me, if I had not signed on Busby’s bond, and I 
, told him yes, that I had signed Busby’s bond a short time 
ago, and he said, '‘ I understand you have,” and he said 
further, “ I have known you from the time that you com¬ 
menced in business here; what you have, you made, and I 
would advise you to be careful. A distiller’s bond is a dan¬ 
gerous bond.” That was his statement to me, and I then 
tried to find out what he meant by it; but that was about 
all\he w T ould say, and I immediately went to Peter P. Manion 
and consulted with him on the same subject, as he was one 
Of the sureties on the bond; and we commenced and got our 
heads together to know if there was any danger, or what he 
meant, and within ten days from that time I went to see the 
Collector, then Con. Maguire, and that was the time I was 
in this trouble with the Big Muddy Iron Company ; at that 
time I was endorser for over $10,000; I guess it was about 
$200,000, as far as that is concerned ; O’Reilly and myself 
were the endorsers, and the Big Muddy Iron Company had 
gone to pieces, and I went to Con. Maguire and told him 
what I heard—that there was something wrong ; and he 
assured me that it was all right, and I then told him that 
my responsibility was not what I thought it was, and that 
I wanted to be released off from that bond. I had to call 
again after getting more information and after ascertaining 
my personal responsibility ; then I knew what was coming. 

I knew the company was gone, and I knew I had to pay, 
and did pay, as I said before, 102,000 and some odd dollars, 
as endorser and stockholder in that concern. Maguire 
finally closed up the Busby Distillery, and required him to 
give a new bond, which was dated December 4th, 1874. If 
I recollect right, I remember those dates distinctly, because 
I thought it was impossible for them to steal very much 


127 


money during the time that he was running, and I have kept 
the dates in my mind ever since. 

Q. Now, these Big Muddy obligations, you had them all 
when you went on the bond, did you not? A. No ; at the 
time that I signed the bond, I thought that the Big Muddy 
concern would not go to pieces. I thought that the collateral 
that I held of the Joliet Iron and Steel Company, which was 
$20,000, that I had to take up as an endorser, was good. I 
did not know but that $20,000 would be good. That went 
to pieces and there was a loss there of over $20,000. 

Q. Is it not true that at the time you went on this bond 
yon were liable upon all the obligations in connection with 
the Big Muddy Coal Company that you were when you went 
off the bond ? A. You have been repeating that so often about 
the Big Muddy Coal Company, that I wish you would cor¬ 
rect yourself; there was no such company as the “ Big 
Muddy Coal Company,” that I know anything about. 

Q. Well, the Big Muddy Iron Company, then? A. It 
was the Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. Well, suppose you answer the question now ? A. I 
will. 

Q. Were you not under the same liability when you went 
on that bond that you were when you went to Maguire and 
told him that you wanted to get off from it ? A. I was not 
as deep in it then, as I knew afterwards, from the fact that 
I did’nt know, as I say, that the whole thing would go to 
pieces; property estimated as worth $250,000, I did’nt know 
that we would have to sell for $115,000, to get out of it, and 
take property in part pay—that is, O’Reilly and I had to ; 
we had to take, a house and lot on Main street for $65,000, in 
part pay, and I supposed that property was good ; when the 
crash came. 

Q. [Interrupting.] I will put the question in another 
shape. Did you contract for the Big Muddy Iron Company 
any new obligations between the date when you went on the 
bond, and the date when you went to Con. Maguire and told 
him that you wanted to be released? A. Well, I think I 
was answering that question correctly. I was liable, as en¬ 
dorser, and we were carrying this load—for instance, at the 
time we had a lot of property that was supposed to be worth—. 

(Counsel for the defendant objects.) 

[Question repeated.] A. I cannot remember the particu¬ 
lars; I think we had to carry, as I said before, these notes; 
they were renewed; time and again; the assets did’nt pan 


128 


out. That is how I found I was in that condition ; that is 
how I lost $102,000 and odd dollars. 

The Commissioner : [Addressing witness.] Did you in¬ 
crease your obligations between those dates ; that is what 
Mr. Glover wants to find out ? /A. It was increased on the 
decrease of the securities that we held, that I thought were 
good. 

By Mr. Glover: [Resuming.] 

Q. Only in that way and not otherwise ? A. I cannot re¬ 
member whether we signed any new obligations except in 
renewals after that date, because they claimed them—well 
along about in the middle of the summer or fall the thing 
went to pieces. 

Q. Fall of what year ? A. 1874. 

Q. The first Big Muddy Iron Company was organized in 
April, 1872, was it not ? A. Along there, yes, sir. 

Q. When was that sold out to the other company ? A. 
My recollection is that it was the first of January, 1873. 

Q. And the failure was when—when did you say it went 
to pieces ? A. If you will let me answer that question I 
will show you where the failure commenced; it commenced 
really in 1873. 

Q. Proceed. A. That is correct ; it commenced in 1873. 
For instance, the first Big Muddy Iron Company was or¬ 
ganized with a capital of $1,860, and O’Reilly and I carried 
the thing for $200,000 or more ; I advanced $45,000 in cash 
in 1872. When the change took place—we had a secretary 
at that time by the name of Bulkley and that got us into a 
good deal of trouble. There was not capital stock except 
as I have stated, $1,860. It was carried on on credit, on 
the credit of O’Reilly and myself. I made a proposition 
that all the stockholders—there were some others that bor¬ 
rowed for the concern- 

Q. [Interrupting.] I don’t care for a complete history of 
that company ; I asked you when it suspended business ? 
A. Wait until I answer the question. 

Q. I object to your discursive, rambling speeches here 
when I ask you a plain question. A. You want to know 
when this crash commenced and I am telling you where it 
commenced, and what was done in 1873. 

Q. I will withdraw that question. A. You can’t with¬ 
draw it for I have answered part of it. 

Q. When did it suspend business ? A. It did not suspend. 

Q. Is it running yet? A. No, sir. 



129 


Q. When did it suspend ? A. It did not suspend. 

Q. Is it running yet? A. No. 

Q. Well, perhaps the Referee can get this witness to 
answer the question. 

The Commissioner . It is not a question of suspense ; 
when did it go to pieces ? 

A. Mr. Glover would not let me answer that question ;he 
withdrew that. 

By Mr. Glover : 

Q. When did it go to pieces ? A. When what went to 
pieces ? 

Q. Do you mean to say you don’t know what I am talking 
about ? A. No, sir ; I do know what you are talking about, 
very well; but you are asking me what went to pieces—the 
first Big Muddy Iron Company, do you mean ? 

The Commissioner. [Addressing the witness.] You made 
a statement in the course of your examination that this com¬ 
pany went to pieces along between the time you signed the 
bond and the time that a new bond was given for Busby ; 
you used that language, as I remember it. 

The Witness. My recollection is that I said it commenced 
in 1873—my obligations—and the concern that went to 
pieces in 1874, is what I had reference to. ’"Now the com¬ 
pany that Mr. Glover is referring to never went to pieces ; it 
paid its debts—it did not suspend. He asked two questions 
that I answered. It did not suspend, it sold out. 

By Mr. Glover. [Resuming.] 

Q. That was the original company ? A. Yes, sir ; the 
original company, and I answered the question correctly. 

Q. I am asking you about the second company ? A. No, 
you were asking me about the first company. 

Q. I ask you about the second company now; did it sus¬ 
pend ? A. The second suspended in 1874. 

Q. At what time? A. Well, I think it was very soon 
after—let me see, I believe ft suspended in 1873 ; well, now 
I am not certain about that; it was in 1873 or 1874. 

Q. Were you not made assignees of the new company— 
you and O’Reilly? A. Assignees for the new company— 
no; I was President of the new company. 

Q. Give us the date when the new company suspended, 
approximately ? A. It was in 1873 or 1874. 

Q. Can’t you get any nearer to it than that? A. I think 
I cover the date when I say 1873 or 1874. 


130 


Q. Can’t yon get any nearer to it than that? A. No, I 
think that is right. 

Q. Was it before or after yon went on this bond ? A. 
Well, if it suspended before August, 1874, it was before, I 
think it did. My recollection is now that it did suspend 
before that date. 

Q. Yes, sometime before, was it not ? A. I can’t remem¬ 
ber the time of the suspension ; the company was in exist¬ 
ence I am pretty sure up to 1874. 

Q. Then, when you went on the bond for the Government, 
in the Busby case, this second company had already gone 
to pieces, had it not, as you call it? A. Yes, sir ; that is 
about the condition of things; the company was gone—that 
is, it could not pay its debts; that is why I loaned 102,000 
dollars, as I said a while ago, and Dr. O’Reilly lost a simi¬ 
lar sum. 

Q. Do you mean to say that you lost that? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Didn’t you testify in the Big Muddy Coal Case that 
that company paid out all the liabilities for which you were 
endorser ? A. I did not testify in the Big Muddy Coal case 
at all. 

Q. Well, the Big Muddy Iron case; that the assets of the 
company paid all the liabilities for which you were endorser ? 
A. No, sir ; I did not. 

Q. Which company are you referring to ? A. I am re¬ 
ferring to the company which burst in 1874. 

Q. Where do you live ? A. I live in the city of St. Louis. 

Q. On what street ? A. At 1113 Compton avenue. 

Q. How long have you lived there ? A. Since 1868. 

Q. Were you living there at the time you went on this 
bond? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you living there at the time the property was 
sold by the United States Marshal ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What block is that in ? A. I couldn’t tell you—nine¬ 
teen hundred and something. 

Q. Did you ever pay any rent for that property to any¬ 
body ? A. No, sir. 

Q. When the title was in somebody else didn’t you pay 
rent for it ? A. No, sir ; I did not. 

Q. How did that happen ? A. How did it happen ? 

Q. Yes, sir ; was there not a time when you did not own 
the property ? A. Well, I don’t know about that, I never 
sold it. 

Q, Is this the property : “ 40 feet on Compton avenue by 
142 feet 6 inches to an alley, beginning 327 feet 6 inches 


131 


south of St. Charles road in block 1986 ?’’ A. Yes, sir ; 
that is correct. 

Q. That is the property, is it. A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wasn’t that sold by the United States Marshal to P. 
B. Keating Jnne 27th, 1877 ? A. I don’t know whether that 
was the date or not; he bought it in at the Court-house 
steps. 

Q. Yes, and held it until 1885, didn’t he? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And during that time of six years you say you never 
paid anybody any rent for it ? A. No, sir. 

Q. What relation is Keiting to you ? A. Brother-in-law. 

Q. Did you marry his sister or he your sister ? A. I mar¬ 
ried his sister. 

Q. Well, then, how do you explain that ? A. Why, it is 
very easy—you know how it is when you marry a party ; 
you know how it is yourself ; I can’t explain that any more 
than you can. 

Q. Oh, I am asking you as I supposed you knew ; I am 
asking you why you didn’t pay any rent to Keiting, if he 
owned the house ? A. AYell, I was never asked for any 
rent. 

Q. Your possession was not disturbed by the United States 
Marshal, was it ? A. No, sir; the Marshal did not have 
anything to do with my stopping there. 

Q. You stayed right there. Now, there was a deed of 
trust put on that property in favor of, or rather by, William 
Henry and wife to R. D. Lancaster, March 27th, 1868, for 
$10,000 ; isn’t that so ? A. No, sir ; that is not so. 

Q. Are you sure of that ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There was a deed of trust put on that property by you 
to B. J. Van Court’s trustee, May 17th, 1876, was there not? 
A. Yes, sir; I made a deed of trust for $3,000. 

Q. AYho was the cestui que trust f A. Mr. Van Court, I 
believe. 

Q. AYho was this A r an Court ? A. He is a citizen, or was 
a citizen at that time—no, I don’t believe he was ; he was 
a citizen of Illinois at that time. 

Q. AA^here is he now ? A. Tn Illinois. 

Q. AVhere in Illinois ? A. At O’Fallon, I think. 

Q. Did you borrow money on that deed of trust ? A. 
Ysir. 

Q. How much ? A. $3,000. 

Q. Did you get the cash ? A. Yes, sir ; I got the cash— 
not from Mr. A"an Court though ; Mr. A r an Court was one of 
our customers ; we done business for him. 


132 


Q. What was the consideration for your giving him that 
deed of trust ? A. I didn’t give it to him. 

Q. Who did you give it to ? A. I gave that deed of trust 
to Joe Tiernan. 

Q. How did VanCourt figure in it? A. His name was 
mentioned in the deed ; it was necessary to name some one, 
and as he was one of our customers and we owed him with 
others, I thought I would use his name ; he was a good man. 

Q. Did you use his name without consulting him ? A. 
No, sir ; I consulted him. 

Q. And he agreed that you should use his name ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he have anything to do with the transaction ? 
A. I don’t understand you—of course he didn’t ; he had 
nothing to do with it—he didn’t make it, I made it. 

Q. I suppose that is pretty plain, but ordinarily the cestui 
que trust gets the money, don’t he ? A. Well, it was not so 
in that case ; the money was already received by me and I 
put up that particular deed of trust as collateral security for 
that. 

Q. As collateral security for what money ? A. For the 
moneys borrowed from the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan. 

Q. Why didn’t you make Joe Tiernan cestuis que trust f 
A. Well, he held it. 

Q. Then VanCourt had nothing to do with it except his 
name was used ? A. That is all. 

Q. Who was the trustee ? A. The deed of trust will show 
that; I have forgotten now. 

Q. How did that happen to lie six years unsatisfied ? A. 
Well, that with others happened to remain that way until I 
made money enough to pay off my obligations. 

Q. Happened to remain that way ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was a demand note, was it not ? A. I don’t remem¬ 
ber ; no, I don’t think it was. 

Q. There was no time specified in the note, was there ? 
A. I don’t think there was ; I am not sure, though, about 
that. 

Q, Well, did Joe Tiernan hold that note all that time? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Your business partner ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was there any objection to his name figuring in the 
transaction ? A. I don’t know of any. 

Q. Then why didn’t it figure? A. Well, I can’t answer 
that question as to why it did not figure. 

Q. You are a real estate man, are you not? A. Yes, sir. 


133 


Q. Is it customary to put a fictitious name in a mortgage? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It is customary ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did Van Court indorse this note ? A. I think he did. 

Q. Was it made payable to him ? A. That is my recol¬ 
lection. 

Q. And he endorsed it without recourse I suppose ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Wasn’t that in order that Joe Tiernan’s name should 
not appear ? A. I don’t know that it was especially for 
that reason or not. 

Q. Specially ? A. I don’t know that it was specially for 
that reason, no. 

Q. Well, was it generally for that reason ? A. I don’t 
think so. 

Q. It was not for that reason at all ? A. It was no reason 
why it should or should not be as far as I can see. 

Q. Where did Van Court live? A. In Illinois ; as long 
as the note was made out in any name, it did’nt make a par¬ 
ticle of difference; the custom is with parties loaning money— 
you asked me if I was a real estate agent—that it is made 
in the name of a party that is very often unknown ; money 
loaners generally do that. 

Q. When was that note paid ? A. It was paid along in 
several years ; it took several years to pay it. 

Q. How long was it paid before it was satisfied? A. 
Well, I can’t say that. 

Q. It was satisfied by the record April 13th, 1883; ac¬ 
cording to the record it was dated May 17th, 1876. At what 
time between those two dates was the money paid to Tier- 
nan ? A. I could’nt state ; I could’nt answer that question. 

Q. What did Tiernan want with the note anyhow ? A. 
He wanted the note to secure him as partner in the concern. 

Q. Secure him from what ? A. For the moneys I had bor¬ 
rowed. 

Q. Moneys borrowed by you from him ? A. From the 
concern to pay off these obligations that I was responsible 
for. 

Q. For Lancaster and Tiernan? A. Not the obligations 
of Lancaster and Tiernan, but the obligations I was under 
to the Big Muddy Iron Company ; I said from Lancaster 
and Tiernan. 

Q. How much did you owe Lancaster & Tiernan at the 
time you did this ? A. It may be $20,000 or $25,000. 

Q. Why did you make a separate mortgage of this piece 


134 


of property ; why was the amount of $3,150 selected ; why 
did’nt you make it $15,000 or whatever it was—$25,000 ? 
A. To make a deed of trust of $25,000 on a piece of property 
that was not worth more than $5,000 ? 

Q. Is that your answer ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Yery well; now what did Keiting pay for this prop¬ 
erty when he bought it at the Marshal’s sale ? A. I have 
forgotten the amount; there was nobody there to bid on it. 

Q. Why ? A. Because nobody would buy the property 
under the circumstances; everybody understood that it was a 
steal; that the Government was swindled by the officers and 
the innocent parties were not prosecuted in that sense ; the 
citizens knew about it. 

Q. What was the value of the property at that time ? A. 
I suppose it would have sold at that time for between four 
and live thousand dollars. 

Q. There was a mortgage on it for $3,150, was there not ? 
A. I saw in the papers from your correspondents in Wash¬ 
ington that it was worth $50,000, but you made a mistake in 
that of about $45,000. 

Q. And there was a mortgage for $3,150 on it ? A. There 
was a mortgage on it for $3,000, I guess. 

Q. There was $150 additional, was there not, for interest ? 
A. I forget the particulars now ; I think so. 

Q. When was the interest paid ? A. The whole thing was 
paid between those dates. 

Q. How paid ? A. Paid to the concern. 

Q. How paid to the concern ? A. How ? 

Q. Yes ? A. I don’t know how except that it was paid. 

Q. Did you pass a check ? A. No. 

Q. Give the currency ? A. No. 

Q. How then ? A. It was paid by the profits—by my 
interest in the concern. 

Q. By a credit on the books ? A. By the profits of the 
concern.* 

Q. By a credit on the books ? A. And an amount that I 
received in 1881 or 1882—a dead horse that I recovered of 
about $10,000. 

Q. What? A. Well, I call it a dead horse. 

Q. An unexpected recovery ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was it paid by credit on the books ? A. What ? 

Q. Was the payment made simply by a credit on the 
partnership accounts? A. Oh, no sir; the thing was car¬ 
ried along just in that way ; I owed the concern right along 
and the concern owed others. 


135 


Q. I think I ought to know whether the matter was set¬ 
tled by credit on the books or by check or a note or pay¬ 
ment in cash ; that is what I have asked some eight or nine 
times. I want you to say yes or no to whether that trans¬ 
action was simply closed up by crediting you — or debiting 
you rather, that much money in the partnership accounts? 
A. That money was paid by my profits in the concern, that 
remained in the concern. 

Q. When was that entry maid that the note had been 
paid by your profits? A. I cannot tell you that. 

Q. Was there ever any entry of that kind make? A. 
That I don’t know. Mr. Tiernan was the book-keeper of 
the concern. 

Q. Did you ever pay any money for it yourself ? A. I 
have answered that question ; that the moneys that I bor¬ 
rowed was paid and the property was released. 

Q. Did you ever pass any money yourself for it to Mr. 
Tiernan? A. Yes, sir ; indirectly I suppose. My profit was 
four or five thousand dollars that remained in the concern. 

I didn’t draw it out and it remained there in that way. 

Q. Instead of your drawing it out it was charged up as 
a satisfaction of this note, is that it ? A. No, it offset what 
I owed. 

Q. Have you ever had an account rendered in which that 
item figured ? A. I don’t know whether Tiernan kept special 
account for that or not. 

Q. Well, will the books show it anywhere ? A. I don’t 
know whether they will or not, I doubt it ; he held it as col¬ 
lateral security until the obligations that I was under to 
the concern were paid. 

Q. But when that was charged—when the payment of 
that note was charged to you on the books, if it was done, 
it must appear somewhere in your books of account, don’t 
it? A. It might or might not; I don’t know that it does. 

Q. Well, if it don’t appear and it was paid in that way, 
you would have that money coming to you still wouldn’t 
you ; that $3,150 as far as that item is concerned ? A. No, 
sir ; I would not. 

Q. Is that the only intelligible explanation that you can 
give of that transaction ? A. I could not have that money; 
I received it then, and as I say paid it back just in that way— 
in the profits of the firm—in the buying and selling of real es¬ 
tate and the commissions for collecting rents ; that is how I 
paid that off. 

Q. When did you strike a balance sheet and determine 


136 


the profits in the firm of Lancaster and Tiernan ? A. At 
the end of every six months. 

Q. That balance sheet goes on the books, don’t it A. 
No, sir. 

Q. How was it done ? A. It was very easy. 

Q. How was it done? A. I cannot tell how Tiernan does 
that. 

Q. You have a share in the business, have you not ? A. 
Yes, sir ; I know that he has figured it from the profits of 
the concern ; it was a very easy mattar to do. 

Q. Now, I will ask you a final question ; is there any¬ 
where in the whole account of the business of that partner¬ 
ship any entry in regard to the payment of that note ? A. 
I cannot answer you as to whether there is or not. 

Q. Ho you remember the date of the judgment against 
you by the Federal Government ? A. In 1876, if I remem¬ 
ber right. 

Q. May 19th, was it not? A. I think it was about that 
date. 

Q. Then you put this mortgage, ostensibly to Van Court 
as trustee, on that property two days before the Federal 
judgment, did you not ? A. I don’t know whether it was 
two days or not; it was about that time, I guess. 

Q. When you put that mortgage on the property two 
days before the judgment, did you know the case was com¬ 
ing up for trial on the 19th ? A. I expect I did. 

Q. Where is Kieting now ? A. He is in the city. 

Q. Was he a man of means in 1877 ? A. O, yes, he was 
worth $63, I think. 

Q. Just about, was it not ? A. Yes he was worth that. 

Q. Just about, was he not ? A. No, sir. 

Q. How much was he worth ? A. 0, he was worth seven 
or eight thousand dollars. 

Q. He has not given you a deed yet, has he ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When? A. Sometime ago. 

Q. About April 10th, 1883 ? A. I guess so. 

Q. About the same date that the other mortgage was satis¬ 
fied ? A. I cannot tell you as to that. 

Q. What did you pay him for his deed ? A. Well, now 
I can’t remember about that either—what I paid him. 

Q. Stagger at it; do the best you can and tell us how it 
was done—whether by check or cash ? A. That I cannot 
state. 

Q. You don’t know whether you paid him anything, do 


137 


you ? A. I paid him whatever he was out on the transac¬ 
tion, I guess. 

Q. $63 ? A. That is what he bought it for. 

. Q- Will you swear that you paid him a cent? A. No, 
sir ; I don’t think I can swear that, for I don’t remember 
it. 

Q. Now, Mr. Lancaster, if it be true that that was a de¬ 
mand note, made the 17th of May, 1876—assuming that to 
be true, and that is what the record shows, what is your ex¬ 
planation, if any, of the fact that that note laid there six 
years before it was satisfied on the record before the mort¬ 
gage was satisfied ? A. I have already given that explana¬ 
tion. 

Q. Have you given all the explanation you can ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Was there ever any partial payment made, or credit 
made, on the back of the note ? A. I cannot say that; no, 
sir. 

Q. You have got the note, have you not? A. I don’t 
know whether I have or not. 

Q. Don’t you preserve those things ? A. No, sir ; after 
they are once paid and cancelled that is the end of them. 

Q. Did you destroy it? A. I don’t know, but I expect 
so ; I don’t know whether I have destroyed that or not. 

Q. Did anybody ever demand payment of this note from 
you prior to the time that it was actually paid ? A. No ; I 
have answered that ; I told you it was held there for that 
purpose. 

Q. Did you own a piece of property thirteen feet three 
inches on the north line of Lucas avenue, by 144 feet east 
line, beginning 188 feet east of Sixteenth street, in block 
527, in 1874, when you went on this bond ? A. I think so. 

Q. Bought it from James C. Adams and wife in 1863, or 
about that time, didn’t you ? A. No ; not about that time; 
I bought it prior to that time. 

Q. I understand you to say that Van Court was a man 
who lived in Illinois, and who was one of the creditors of 
the Big Muddy Iron Company ? A. I didn’t say so. 

Q. You said that he was one of the customers of Lancas¬ 
ter and Tiernan, perhaps ? A. That is what I said. 

Q. Is he-a customer now ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where does he live in Illinois ? A. The same place, 
I think ; I don’t think that he has removed. 

Q. Where is it ? A. O’Fallon, Illinois. 


V 


138 


Q. How far from the city ? A. I could not tell you ; I 
never have been over there. 

Q. Leaving that and coming back to this property on the 
corner of Lucas avenue and 16th. Did you put a deed of 
trust on that property on December 22nd, 1875, to the Citi¬ 
zens’ Savings Bank’s trustees, Joseph O’Neill, Henry Yon 
der Au, Jr. ? A. What date ? I made a deed of trust on 
that property, but I cannot tell the date. 

Q, Did you make it to the Citizens’ Savings Bank’s trus¬ 
tees ? A. I did. 

Q. How much money did you get on that? A. I didn’t 
get any on it. 

Q. Explain that transaction ? A. The Central Savings 
Bank held a note of the Big Muddy Iron Company that I 
was endorser on, and the balance due on that note; after 
giving credit for the collateral that was held in addition to 
my endorsement, I think was $2,300 or $2*400, or between 
those amounts, and they required payment and I did’nt have 
the money, and I gave them a note secured by a deed of 
trust on that house and lot on Christy avenue ; it is thirteen 
feet in place of eighteen front. 

Q. Well, was that as collateral ? A. No, sir; it was not 
as collateral; it was as payment for what I owed the bank. 

Q. Then they gave you credit on your indebtedness to the 
amount of the face of the note? A. That particular note 
that I am referring to of the Big muddy was a note of $6, - 
000 ; that was the balance due on the Big Muddy note. 

Q. And instead of giving them the cash you gave them a 
mortgage for $2,349.78 at six months, eight per cent, from 
date, to close out the transaction ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That was the note due six months after date at eight 
per cent, from date ; do you know when that mortgage was 
foreclosed ? A. I don’t remember. 

Q. Do you know it was foreclosed about six days before 
the sale under the Federal judgment ? A. I do not. 

Q. When was that note paid ? A. That I cannot tell. I 
cannot give you the dates. 

Q. Was it paid ? A. The note was paid, yes, sir. 

Q. Paid by whom ? A. It was paid by me. 

Q. To whom ? A. That is, it was paid by the sale of the 
property. 

Q. Who owned it then ? A. I owned it before it was sold 
by the bank. 

Q. No, but who owned the note ? A. The bank. 

Q. The bank owned the note at the sale ? A. Yes, sir. 


139 


Q. What did it bring—wliat did the property bring ? A. 
That I cannot tell you ; I have forgotten. 

Q. Did the bank buy ? A. No, I think not. 

Q. Who bought ? i think, that Joe Tiernan bought it. 

Q. Your partner ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. For whom did he buy it ? A. For himself. 

Q. Didn’t buy it for you ? A. No, sir ; he didn’t buy it 
for me. 

Q. What did he pay for it ? A. That I have forgotten. 

Q. Will you swear that the bank owned that note up to 
the time of the sale ? A. I do. 

Q. It was not bought by Tiernan ? A. What was not 
bought ? 

Q. The note was not bought by Tiernan prior to the sale, 
from the bank ? A. It is my recollection that the bank 
sold it. 

Q. Will you swear the note was never paid before that 
time ? A. I do ; I never paid it. 

Q. Never bought by anybody at your instigation ? A. 
Not that I remember. 

Q. Can there be any doubt in your mind about that prop¬ 
osition ? A. I think, not; I think I am correct; I gave 
that deed of trust to pay that note and it was paid in that 
way if I remember, but that is a good many years ago ; I 
cannot tell. 

Q. What became of the Big Muddy note ? A. I suppose 
it is torn up. 

Q. Did you receive it ? A. I don’t believe I ever received 
that note. 

Q. Why didn’t you, if you paid it ? A. The bank could 
not find it at the time the note was paid. 

Q. Could not find it ? A. That is my recollection now. 

Q. Were they pressing you for settlement ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And they could not find the note? A. No, they held 
the note ; at the time I gave this deed of trust they held the 
note because they were not satisfied that the security I gave 
was sufficient, and O’Neill held the original note as well as 
the note that I gave him and the deed of trust; I remember 
that distinctly. 

Q. Then it was additional security? A. No, sir ; it was 
not additional security ; it was for the balance due on that 
note ; they would not give up the original note, I remember 
now distinctly, but there was an endorsement on that note 
that when this note [referring to the one I gave], was paid 


140 


that the other one was paid in full ; there was a controversy 
about that afterwards. 

Q. That statement that they could not find it was not 
true, was it ? A. Who said it was not true ?. 

Q. Was it true or not that they could not find it ? A. I 
say they could not find it at the time, and I remember now 
—my recollection now is that they never did find it. 

Q. Then your other statement made a few minutes back 
that the note was paid by this transaction was not correct, 
was it ? A. That was correct. 

Q. How could they retain the note when it was paid ? A. 
What note ? 

Q. The Big Muddy Iron Company note ? A. They re¬ 
tained it because they did; I could not find it; the note that 
I gave when paid was to be in full payment for the Big Mud¬ 
dy Company’s note; there was an indorsement to that effect 
on the note. 

Q. On what note ? A. On the Big Muddy. 

Q. I thought you said that they could not find it ? A. I 
do say so now, and then. 

Q. When was that endorsement put on it ? A. At the 
time I gave the deed of trust. 

Q. Well, that is the time I am talking about; when you 
gave the deed of trust why didn’t you take up the other 
note? A. Because they would not deliver it. 

Q. Why ? A. I have answered that question. 

Q. Was not this additional mortgage put on to cover 
your property from the Federal Gfovernment ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Bo you swear to that? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was made in good faith ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. For a valuable consideration ? A. No, sir ; I am sorry 
to say that the consideration was not valuable to me ; it was 
a dead horse. 

Q. It was made without any design to defraud the Gov¬ 
ernment ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was collateral? A. That $2,300 or $2,4Q0 note was 
a part of the money that I lost in the concern ; it was put 
up to pay the balance of that note. 

Q. But it did’nt pay it ? A. It did pay it. 

Q. If it paid it, why did’nt you get the original note ? A. 
If you will compel an officer of a bank to do something that 
I could not do at that time, I will be under obligations to 
you. 

Q. In other words, you know of no legaFreason ? A. The 
reason was that they held it because my note was paid. 


141 


Q. How was your note paid ? A. It was paid, as I under¬ 
stand it, by the sale of the property. 

Q. How much did the property bring ? A. That I could’nt 
tell you without referring to the records. 

Q. Were yon there when it was sold ? A. IJdon’t think 
I was; I don’t remember that I was. 

Q. Hid you get the Big Muddy Iron Company’s note then ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Where is it now ? A. I could’nt tell you. 

Q. Hid you ever get it from the bank ? A. I don’t think 
I ever did. 

Q. Hid Joe Tiernan pay the bank cash $2,400 ? A. I ex¬ 
pect he did. 

Q. Ho you know ? A. I don’t know, but I expect he did, 
because they would’nt give it up—that note, unless it was 
paid. 

Q. Hid he get the other note ? A. I don’t think he did ; 
I don’t know whether he did or not though ; I can’t answer 
that question. 

Q. Ho you know to this day what became of that note ? 
A. I do not. 

Q. What became of the $2,349 note ? A. That was paid 
by the sale of the property. 

Q. Where is the note now ? A. Either among my jjapers 
or destroyed. 

Q. That sale was just six days before the sale under the 
Federal judgment, was it not ? A. I don’t know whether it 
was or not. 

Q. That is what the record shows. Was that property 
improved ? A. The Christy avenue property ? Yes. 

Q. Who collected the rent between the time it was sold 
and the time it was deeded back to you ? A. Tiernan did. 

Q. Joe Tiernan ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is Lancaster & Tiernan did? A. Well, it is a 
firm, of course. 

Q. Who got the rents ? A. I couldn’t say that. 

Q. Hid you get them ; didn’t you get them ? A. I think 
there was very little rent as far as that is concerned. 

Q. Hidn’t you get them ? A. I don’t say whether I did 
or not ; I don’t know whether I did get that particular rent 
or not. 

Q. You don’t know whether you did or not. I mean 
didn’t you get the benefit of them; don’t you know that 
you did ? A. I won’t say whether I did or not, for I don’t 
know exactly how that thing was done. 


142 


Q. Do you mean to say that you don’t know whether you 
got them or not ? A. I clo ; that is I don’t now remember 
how the thing was done. 

Q. You don’t know whether you got rents from property, 
the title to which was in another man’s name for six years; 
is that what we understand you to say? A. Tiernan kept 
those accounts ; I can’t tell how he kept them. 

Q. What did you pay Tiernan when he deeded this prop¬ 
erty back to you ? A. I don’t know; it was a settlement of 
all the transactions between him and me. 

Q, What kind of a settlement ; was it a partnership set¬ 
tlement ? A. That is the way I understand it. 

Q. Where is it? A. Where is what? 

Q. The settlement ? A. I have not got it. 

Q. You have not ? A. No, sir ; there was no writing that 
I know of. 

Q. A mere verbal settlement ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was it entered on the books of the partnership ? A. 
That I can’t say ; I answer the same to that as I did before. 

Q. Can you give any explanation for the $2,345 note that 
you say you gave to the Citizens’ Savings Bank’s trustees 
in good faith, without any intention to defraud the Gov- 
rnment—you say that, don’t you? A. I do. 

Q. Can you give any explanation for that note lying 
eighteen months overdue before it was foreclosed? A. I 
can’t just now. 

Q. What was this property worth on Sixteenth and Lucas 
avenue at that time ? A. It was worth between $2,400 and 
$2,500. 

Q. What rent did it bring ? A. It brought about, I 
think, $20 a month. 

Q. And you mortgaged it for about its value, did’nt you ? 
A. Yes, sir; I think so; I know that was one of the things 
that O’Neil was particular about; he thought it was not suf¬ 
ficient security for the balance I owed the bank. 

Q. And when the Marshal came to sell and your partner 
bought, that mortgage was still on the property, was it not ? 
A. Well, now, I have forgotten whether it was or not. 

Q. Was’nt that mortgage canceled in April, 1883, or 
rather the deed conveyed back to you in 1883 ? A. I don’t 
know whether that is the date or not. 

Q. You filed in Washington some statements explaining 
these transactions at the time, that there was a so-called in¬ 
vestigation by the District Attorney, did you not—didn’t 
you write out a statement in regard to certain of this prop- 


143 


erty, explaining these transfers by writing to the Secretary 
of the Treasury ?. A. No, sir; I did not I did not write to 
the Secretary of the Treasury. 

Q. I refer, sir, to the statement of It. D. Lancaster made 
before William H. Bliss, United States Attorney for this 
District ? A. I made a statement to Bliss. 

Q. You made it in writing, did you not? A. No, sir; I 
did not. 

Q. Didn’t you make it in writing? A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you make it through a stenographer? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. And signed it afterwards ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When you signed it you made it it writing, didn’t 
you ? A. I made it in that way. 

Q. Joe Tiernan made one, too, didn’t he ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You consulted Tiernan about this statement, did you 
not? A. No, sir. 

Q. Not at all ? A. I wanted him to state the facts. If 
you will let me explain just the whole matter, I will ex¬ 
plain it. 

Q. Proceed. I don’t mean this whole investigation mat¬ 
ter ; I ask you whether you consulted with Tiernan about 
this statement which he made to Bliss ? A. As you stated 
to the Secretary that you had four witnesses to prove that 
what you said was true, and then when I demanded through 
Bliss that you come and bring your witnesses, you didn’t 
come; then I went to the other parties and asked them to 
make statements to Mr. Bliss of the facts as they occurred 
at that time. 

Q. Did you see Tiernan’s statement before it was made % 
A. I don’t know whether I did or not. 

Q. Don’t you know that you did ? 

[Counsel for the plaintiff objects.] 

Q. Were not both statements made under the supervision 
of Laughlin, your attorney? A. I don’t know ; I believe 
they were, but I don’t know ; I wasn’t there. 

Q. Did you ever see Tiernan’s statement in reference to 
this particular piece of property ? A. I don’t know whether 
I saw it after he made it or not. 

Q.* Did you see it at all ? A. I think I saw it in handing 
it over to Bliss. 

Q. Didn’t he say that this note was paid by credit on the 
books of Lancaster & Tiernan ? 

[Counsel for plaintiff objects ; objection sustained.] 


144 


Q. Who were the trustees in that deed of trust to the 
State Saving’s Bank ? 

[Counsel for plaintiff objects ; objection sustained.] 

Q. Bid you own the east half of lot 2, block 1 of H. M. 
Bean’s addition, 13 feet 6 inches on the north line of Lucas 
Avenue, by depth of 70 feet, block 528, property that you 
bought from Bockery and wife ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You owned that at the time of giving this bond, did 
you not ? A. I did. 

Q. Yow at the time the bond was given you had a mort¬ 
gage on that property, did you not, to A. W. Mead as trus¬ 
tee ? A. Yes, sir ; I think I had at that time. 

Q, For how much—was it about $11,879.20? A. It is 
my recollection that it was about that amount. 

Q. What was the consideration for that mortgage ? A. 
The consideration was that I had to borrow money—there 
was no consideration. 

Q. Well, did you get the money on that note ? A. Yes. 
sir. 

Q. In cash ? A. Yes, sir ; I put that up as collateral to 
pay off, and got the money to pay off notes in the State 
Bank. 

Q. You put that up # as collateral with whom ? A. My 
recollection is that it was put up as collateral with the State 
Bank. 

Q. To secure a prior existing indebtedness ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How does A. W. Mead come in? A. I don’t know; 
Mr. Mead was my attorney at that time. 

Q. He had no real connection with it, had he ? A. Yes, 
sir ; I think he made the papers out himself. 

Q. He advanced no money on it ? A. Yo ; he did not. 

Q. It was like this Yan Court note ; he was made the 
payee, and then indorsed without recourse ? A. That is my 
recollection ; it is my recollection that they did not want to 
have deeds of trust made to them, because they go on re¬ 
cord ; and I might as well state here that I think the reason 
why- 

[Counsel for defendant objects.] 

The Witness. Then I can’t state why Mead’s name* was 
put there. 

Mr. Laughlin. You need not answer the question. 

Q. What was the indebtedness for which this was put up 
as collateral; how much did you owe the State Bank at that 
time ? A. I owed, as indorser for the Big Muddy Iron Com- 



145 


pany, about that amount that the State Bank held of notes 
of the Joliet Iron and Steel Company that I was indorser 
on. 

Q. You had indorsed for the Big Muddy Iron Company ; 
you had indorsed the notes of the Joliet Iron and Steel Com¬ 
pany for the Big Muddy Iron Company ; is that so ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you discount them ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And they had been discounted where ? A. In the 
State Bank. 

Q. Do you mean the State Bank of Missouri ? A. I do. 

Q. And about the time this mortgage was given, June 
11th, 1874, did the bank demand of you further security? 
A. The way you put that question I cannot answer it. 

Q. Did you volunteer this additional security or did they 
demand it of you? A. I didn’t say that. 

Q. I am asking you ? A. I say that I put it up as col¬ 
lateral, sir ; don’t you understand what the meaning of the 
term collateral security is ? 

Q. Certainly ; but I ask you whether there was a pressure 
on the part of the bank to have you do that, or whether you 
did that of your own accord ? A. I did it on the pressure 
of the bank. Now my recollection is that these notes of the 
Joliet Company were past due ; the Joliet Company had 
suspended and the bank had discounted them, as I under¬ 
stood, for the benefit of the Big Muddy, with my endorse¬ 
ment on them ; the notes to that amount were lying there as 
dead notes, and the bank always required live notes, as they 
called them ; there couldn’t be any live notes made by the 
Joliet Iron and Steel Company on that occasion, as they had 
suspended and were not doing business—didn’t pay their 
debts—and I was called on as an indorser to take them up ; 
I took them up by borrowing at that time, as I was pretty 
well used up in cash, by putting up a new note, as I remem¬ 
ber it, and putting up this property as collateral ; I didn’t 
want anybody to indorse for me, notwithstanding I was in¬ 
dorser for the Big Muddy Iron Company ; I didn’t want 
anybody as long as I had security to endorse for me; there¬ 
fore I made a deed of trust and put it up as collateral for the 
payment of the obligations that I was held for by the State 
Bank of Missouri. 

Q. How long had the notes of the Joliet Steel Company— 
I believe that is the name of the corporation, been due ? A. 
I could not say that. 


146 


Q. Sometime ? A. I suppose so ; they were past due ; I 
know that. 

Q. How long past due ? A. I could not tell you that. 

Q. A year or two ? A. No, I think not. 

Q. Six months ? A. I could not answer, as I cannot an¬ 
swer correctly. 

Q. Hid you say it was over a month ? A. I don’t know 
that it was over two days; it may be that it was six weeks 
or six months, but I don’t know that it was over two days. 

Q. Had they gone to protest ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you had been notified ? A. I had been notified 
that they were protested. 

Q. Who was the president of the bank at that time A. 
You understand what protest is, don’t you ? 

Q. Who was the president of the bank, I said ? A. James 
H. Britton. 

Q. Who was the cashier ? A. I could not answer that 
question ; I know that Britton was president, and I am very 
sorry that he discounted those notes on my endorsement. 

Q. On April 24th, 1876, a short time before the judgment 
in the Federal Court, you gave another deed of trust on this 
property, did you not, to James Ennis’, trustees, Joseph 
O’Neill and 0. B. Thayer ? A. I did. 

Q. What did you get on that—did you get money—the 
cash on it ; or was it to secure some antecedent debt ! A. 
That was to secure- 

Q. (Interrupting.) An antecedent debt? A. Moneys 
that had been paid by me. 

Q. Paid to whom by you ? A. Paid to the bank. 

Q. What banks ? A. Well, I have forgotten now whether 
it was the State bank or others ; there was quite a number 
of banks at that time that did business for the company. 

Q. Hid you get the money on that second deed of trust ? 
A. I got the money to pay off the obligations that I put up 
this deed of trust for. 

Q. Hid James Ennis advance you $15,000 on that note ? 
A. No, sir; he did’nt do that. 

Who did do it ? A. That was done by the banks, and 
by the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan. 

Q. How did James Ennis come in? A. I believe that 
question was overruled. It was necessary to have somebody 
in the deed of trust. 

Q. He is not the real party in interest ? A. No, sir ; the 
same as Van Court was. 

Q. Just like Van Court and A AY. Meade ? A. Yes. sir. 



147 


Q. Who did you say were the parties—the banks ? A. 
Yes, sir; the banks and the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan. 

Q. How much was Lancaster & Tiernan’s interest, and 
how much the banks ? A. At that time Lancaster & Tier- 
nan was interested over $20,000. 

Q. They did’nt get that on this $15,000 note ? A. But it 
went towards securing this $20,000 though. 

Q. How much of the $15,000 did Lancaster & Tiernan ad¬ 
vance ? A. All of it. 

Q. Then how were the banks interested ? A. The banks 
were interested also because we got money from the banks. 
Now I cannot tell the particulars; there were a great many 
transactions at that time, and it would be impossible for me 
' to go, from bank to bank, and state how much money I got 
in one bank, and how much I paid in another, etc. 

Q. What other banks were interested—if you can re¬ 
member the names of the banks, if you don’t remember the 
amounts? A. I don’t remember; there were a number of 
banks that discounted paper- 

Q. [Interrupting] Yo ; but this note? A. What note? 

Q. This note of $15,000, dated April 24th, 1876? A. As 
I said before, that note was made for the purpose of secur¬ 
ing the moneys borrowed. 

Q. Already borrowed ; A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Borrowed before that time ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How much of that money had been borrowed of Lan¬ 
caster and Tiernan, and how much of other persons or cor¬ 
porations ? A. That I could not state. 

Q. Didn’t you say just now that Lancaster & Tiernan was 
the whole ? A. I said that I owed Lancaster & Tiernan over 
$20,000 at that time ; and I owed another- 

Q. [Interrupting] W as this deed of' trust given to secure 
that? A. Yes, sir ; partly so. 

Q. How much of it went to secure that liability ? A. 
Well, I didn’t secure all of that. 

Q. It all went, but did not cover the amount exactly? A. 
It didn’t cover it; there was more due than the deed of trust 
called for. 

Q. Can you explain why is was that that deed of trust was 
foreclosed just before the sale under the United States judg¬ 
ment, and two years before its maturity ? A. No ; I cannot 
tell, unless it was at the instance of Mr. Tiernan. 

Q. Was Tiernan the holder ? A. Tiernan was the holder 
at that time. 




148 


Q. He was your business partner, was he not ? A. Yes, 
sir ; he was. 

Q. Well, he would not sell you out under a forced sale, 
would he? A. Well, those were dangerous times. 

Q. Dangerous to whom ? A. Dangerous to him. 

Q. Why so ? A. He owed as well as I did. 

Q. How much? A. 20,000 and odd dollars. 

Q. He was in debt, was he ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is that all you can say ? A. I can say a good deal 
more if you ask the questions. 

Q. Was there a default on the interest note ? A. There 
must have been. 

Q. Was there ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. You defaulted on the interest note ? A. That is my 
recollection. 

Q. Did you do it purposely to beat the Federal Govern¬ 
ment? A. No, sir ; I did not do anything purposely. 

Q. Who had possession of this note for $15,000 during the 
time that it was an ostensible liability ; who had the pos¬ 
session of it between the time of the giving of the mortgage 
and the foreclosure ? A. I couldn’t say as to who had it 
during that time. 

Q. Did you have it ? A. No, sir ; I didn’t have it. 

Q. Did the firm have it ? A. I say I could not say 
whether the firm had it during all of that time or not. 

Q. Did you say they did not have it during all of that 
time ? A. I could not say whether they did or not. 

Q. How did it happen that Tiernan gave you back a deed 
of trust on the same property at three years with interest 
notes due every six months for $9,500,—how did that hap¬ 
pen, what is the meaning of that transaction ? After he 
bought the property how should he mortgage it to you, and 
if you were hard up how could you loan him money ? A. I 
think you are asking something that never occurred. 

Q. Were you not the cestui que trust in that deed ? A. 
What deed ? 

Q. The deed of trust made May 14th, 1877, the very date 
of the foreclosure of the old deed of trust on the same prop¬ 
erty. I ask you whether you didn’t get that note after it 
was executed and keep it ? A. No, sir, I didn’t; I under¬ 
stood you to say that it was made to me ; I thought you 
were stating a fact. 

Q. Now, who is L. Freeman, it says “L. Freeman” as 
trustee ? A. I don’t know who he was. 

Q. Who was the trustee—do you know ? A. I do not. 


149 


Q. Do you know anything about that mortgage ? A. No, 
not specially. 

Q. Well, in anyway, special or otherwise ? A. Well, I don’t 
know about the particulars about that mortgage, just now. 

Q. You don’t know who L. Freeman was ? A. I do not. 

Q. You don’t know where the mortgage was given ? A. 
Well, I cannot state that. 

Q. Who was James Tiernan ? A. James Tiernan was of 
the firm of Woodward & Tiernan. 

Q. He was a brother of Joe Tiernan ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He is now dead, is he not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He died how long ago ? A. Oh, about a year ago, I 
guess. 

Q. Not quite that long, was it ? A. Oh, that is my recol¬ 
lection—about a year ago. 

Q. When did that come into the possession of Lancaster 
& Tiernan, or of Tiernan ? A. I couldn’t tell you just now. 

Q. Did Lancaster & Tiernan get that $9,500 that was 
raised on that note, if any was raised ? A. I couldn’t tell 
who got that. 

Q. You know that property was sold by the marshal, 
Federal marshal, to James Tiernan, don’t you, under the 
judgment obtained against you in the Busby case ? A. 
Yes, sir ; I think it was. 

Q. Do you remember how much it brought ? A. I do 
not. 

Q. About $20? A. About enough to pay costs, I sup¬ 
pose. 

Q. Do you know why that laid three years overdue be¬ 
fore it was satisfied ? A. What ? 

Q. That mortgage was given by James Tiernan and L. 
Freeman as trustees ? A. I couldn’t tell. 

Q. Is that property improved ? A. Well, partly. 

Q. Was it improved in 1874 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who got the rent during this period ? A. I think 
James Tiernan did. 

Q. Which Tiernan ? A. James Tiernan, that is my recol¬ 
lection. 

Q. Did Lancaster & Tiernan get any! A. Not that I 
know of. 

Q. Did you get any? A. No, not that I know of ; my 
recollection is that they went to James Tiernan—that is my 
recollection of ir. 

Q. You know that James Tiernan turned up as owner of 
that note and satisfied the mortgage, don’t you ? A. Well, 




150 


lie had some transactions with his brother about which I 
can’t answer. 

Q. When did he acquire it ? A. That I cannot answer. 

Q. When did you first learn that he owned it ? A. That 
I could not tell now. 

Q. Didn’t you have it satisfied, that mortgage ? A. I 
didn’t have it done ; I guess Tiernan did it, if I remember 
right, somebody did it, whoever sold it. 

Q. Didn’t you acquire that property by deed from Tier- 
nan to R. D, Lancaster on April 4th, 1883? A. I don’t 
know whether that is the date or not ? 

Q. And was not that nine days before the mortgage was 
satisfied ? A. I cannot answer that question. 

Q. If that is the case have you any explanation to give as 
to why you don’t know who satisfied it, and why ? A. I 
don’t know whether you are asking your questions with a 
view to their truthfulness or not, and therefore I cannot an¬ 
swer them. 

Q. Did you pay that note ? A. What note ? 

Q. The note that was given by James Tiernan to L. Free¬ 
man *as trustee, secured by deed of trust, dated May 14th, 
1877, for $9,500 ? A. That note was not given to me. 

Q. IS"o, but you bought the property, according to the record, 
before it was satisfied ? A. I cannot answer about that note; 
I don’t know that I ever saw it. 

Q. Did James Tiernan ever pay that note ? A. I cannot 
Tell whether he did or not. 

Q. Was that note ever charged up to you in the partner¬ 
ship accounts ? A. That I don’t know; I can’t answer that 
question. 

Q. Have you any impression about that ? A. No, I could 
not give you any impression about it—that is, the particu¬ 
lars about it. 

Q. Is it not a fact that you got the property back from 
Tiernan before the mortgage was satisfied? A* I can’t an¬ 
swer that question as to whether I did or not. 

Q. Do you remember that Tiernan conveyed it back to 
you? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you own it now ? A. Yes, sir; Iown it now. 

Q. Do you remember when Tiernan conveyed it back to 
you? A. No, sir. 

Q. What did you pay him for it? A. Well, that I can¬ 
not tell; it is a matter between him and Joe Tiernan. 

Q. The conveyance from James Tiernan to you was a mat¬ 
ter between Jim and Joe? A. Yes, sir. 


151 


Q. Explain that? A. I cannot explain it; Iliad rather 
he would explain it; he can explain it. 

Q. How did yon come to become the purchaser of the 
property; how did yon come to get it back from James Tier- 
nan ? A. I suppose it was bought back or paid for, as the 
other property was paid for. 

Q. By profits ? A. I expect that is the condition of things. 

Q. Were you not watching your profits to find out how 
much they were, and how they were applied ? A. Yes, sir; 
there was no trouble about that. 

Q. How does it happen that you don’t know something 
about that ? A. I do not know that that is the condition of 
things, but when you ask me*positive questions, I cannot 
answer them—I cannot answer as to dates or as to amounts, 
for I have not got them with me. 

• Q. Then, Mr. Lancaster, it is your doubt about dates that 
prevents you from ansAvering these questions correctly ? A. 
No, sir; I don’t think so. 

Q. Then is it a pure and simple lack of memory on the 
subject? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is it, is it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How is your memory—pretty good, as a rule ? A. It is, 
as a rule, where things happen that impress my memory. 

Q. You knew these transactions were attacked in the pub¬ 
lications of which you have complained, didn’t you, before 
you came here to-day ? A. When ? 

Q. You haA^e sued for libel? A. Within the last year; 
yes, sir. 

Q- Hid you investigate these matters, and look them up, 
so as to be able to answer correctly about them ? A. No, 
sir; not specially. 

Q. Is there any entry on the books of Lancaster & Tier- 
nan that you ever saAv, or that you know of, that touches 
this $9,500 note, showing Avhetlier it was charged to you or 
not ? A. I don’t know A\diether there is or not. 

Q. Is there any entry touching this deed of James Tier- 
nan to you, dated April 4th, 1883 ? A. I don’t know that 
there is on the books. 

Not being able to complete the taking of said depositions 
by reason of want of time, I adjourn the further taking of 
the same until Monday, April 18th, 1887. 


Pursuant to adjournment, as above stated, on April 18th, 
1887, I continued the taking of said deposition as follows : 





152 


E. D. Lancaster, in continuation of his deposition com- 
menced on April 16th, 1887, on his oath further says : 

Direct Examination resumed toy Mr. Glover. 

Q. Did you own a piece of property in block 29, on the 
west line First street, or First and Locust streets at any 
time ? A. I cannot answer, by that description, whether I 
did or not. 

Q. On Main and Locust streets, property acquired, ac¬ 
cording to the record, by William J. Lewis and Eebecca, 
his wife, and conveyed to you and Thomas O’Eeilly; do you 
recognize that property ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You owned that property at the time that bond was 
given, didn’t you, or don’t you recollect ? A. I think I did, 
I am not certain about the date. 

Q. From the record it appears you bought it July 20th, 
1874 \ A. July 20tli. 

Q. Does that coincide with your recollection ? A. About 
there. It was in 1874, I know. 

Q. Yow, there was a deed of trust put on the property 
July 21st, 1874, that is, the next day, by yourself and 
Thomas O’Eeilly to the Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance 
Company’s trustee; do you remember that transaction ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. To secure $40,000 and interest notes? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I will ask you what Thomas O’ Eeilly was, and what 
your relation with him was, whether intimate or otherwise? 
A. Dr. Thomas O* Eeilly, physician and a stockholder in the 
Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. In the same company with which you were officially 
connected ? A. The same company I was in. He was presi. 
dent of the Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. Dr. O’Eeilly was president! A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I suppose you received the money on that $40,000 
mortgage, did you ? A. He did. 

Q. That was not for a precedent debt ? A. No, sir; we re¬ 
ceived the money. 

Q. An ordinary loan’? A. An ordinary loan. 

Q. Did you and Dr. O’Eeilly together own the whole of 
that property, or were there other part owners? A. We 
owned it all. 

Q. When was that incumbrance paid, if paid at all ? A. 
It must have been three or four years afterwards. 

Q. Was the mortgage satisfied of record? A. Yes, sir; 
I expect it was. 


153 


Q. Wliat date, do you remember? A. Though I do not 
know that I ever saw it. 

Q. How long was it paid before it was satisfied ? A. I 
-can’t tell you that, because I have not seen it. 

Q. Was it finally paid off ? A. I do not know, I have 
not seen the records and cannot tell. 

Q. You know whether you paid the debt or not, don’t 
you, or was it on the property when you transferred your 
title or interest in it ? A. I think it was. 

Q. Can you say whether it was paid by you ? A. No, sir ; 
it was not. 

Q. Now was ncft that mortgage on the property at the 
time of the sale by the United States Marshal to Thomas 
McDermott ? A. When was that ? 

Q. June 1st, 1877, according to the records. A. I think 
so. 

Q. Was it not paid before that time ? A. No, sir. 

Q. When did you transfer your interest to Dr. O’Reilly? 
A. I cannot tell you the date, the records will show. 

Q. According to the record it was September 20th, 1877. 
Does that coincide with your recollection on the subject, or 
have you any recollection on it ? A. I have not, according 
to that date. 

Q. Who is Thomas McDermott ? A. He was a mechanic 
here, a contractor. 

Q. A poor man or a rich man—do you know anything 
about him ? A. I don’t know how rich he was. 

Q. Do you know anything about him ? A. Yes, I know 
about him. 

Q. Was he a master contractor ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. At that time ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. An intimate friend of yours ? A. Partly. 

Q. Wholly ? A. No, sir. 

Q. What do you mean by partly ; A. I can’t say. It is 
pretty hard to say whether a man is an intimate friend of 
mine. I thought you were an intimate friend of mine at one 
time, but I have found out since you were not. It is hard to 
tell whether McDermott was. 

Q. McDermott is the only point of interest in the case. 
Don’t you know whether he was a friend or not ? A. I as¬ 
sume he was. 

Q. Were you intimate with him ? A. Not very. 

Q. Did you have any business transactions with him. A. 
Yes, sir. ' 

t Q. At or about that time ? A. I did not myself, personally. 


154 


Q. Who got him to buy the property at the marshal’s 
sale ? A. That I could not say, probably it was Mr. Tier- 
nan, I could not say whether Mr. Tiernan or myself. 

Q. You are pretty sure it was one or the other? A. I 
could not say positively, as I say. 

Q. If it was Mr. Tiernan, didn’t he do it at your instance ? 
A. That I could not say. 

Q. Well, why did McDermott, if you know, convey to 
O’Reilly, instead of to you? A. I suppose it was done so 
as to give the title direct to O’Reilly, in place of me, be¬ 
cause I had no title in it at the time the sale was made ; I 
had no interest in it ; I had no title in it*. 

Q. Were you a married man between June 24th, 1874, 
and September, 1877—was your wife living ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Between 1874 and 1877 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You subsequently conveyed the property to Dr. 
O’Reilly yourself, didn’t you? A. I think I gave him a 
quit claim deed. 

Q. Why didn’t your wife join in that deed, if you know ? 
A. I don’t know why she did not ; I expect she did. 

Q. The record does not show it, so far as I have it ? A. It 
is news to me if she did not. 

Q. Well, now, was there not an understanding between 
you and McDermott that he should hold the property for 
you, your half interest? A. Yo, sir. 

Q. Was it improved ? A. It was. 

Q. Who got the rents between the Marshal’s sale, on June 
21st, 1877, and your deed to O’Reilly, on September 20th, 
1877 ? A. I think the Connecticut Mutual and the city of 
St. Louis got the rents that were collected during that time; 
that is my recollection. 

Q. Did you get any of them? A. I don’t think so. 

Q. Don’t think so ; do you know ? A. I did not. 

Q. Are you sure you did not get any rent from that prop¬ 
erty ? A. I think the rents were not sufficient to pay the 
taxes and interest. 

Q. Is that the reason why you did not get any? A. That 
is not the reason, but that is an answer to the question. 

Q. My question is whether you are positive about it; to 
say either way, with certainty, that you did or did not ? 
A. I think I can answer that I did not. 

Q. Do you remember that you did not ? A. To the best 
of my recollection, the income did not pay the interest and 
taxes. 


155 


Q. What do you mean by saying the city got some of the 
rents ? A. The taxes, I mean by that. 

Q. Now, you stated that you did not know whether the 
deed of trust to the Connecticut Mutual was paid off ; can 
you say that was paid off prior to the 31st of August, 1877? 
A. I cannot. 

Q. Have you. received any of the rents of that property, 
directly, or indirectly, since the Marshal’s sale, June 21st, 
1877? A. I think not. 

Q. Do you know ? A. That is my answer ; I think not; 
I don’t think I did. 

Q. How did the Connecticut Mutual get the rent, if it got 
any ? A. I didn’t say the rent; I said income. 

Q. How did it get the interest, if it got any ?• A. Which 
interest*? 

Q. Who paid it to them—the interest ? A. I think Dr. 
O’Reilly, or probably Mr. Tiernan. 

Q. What did Mr. Tiernan have to do with it ? A. I had 
to pay my share of it up to the time- 

Q. Up to the time of the Marshal’s sale ? A. Up to the 
Marshal’s sale. I think afterwards I paid a good deal more. 

Q. Who collected the rents between the Marshal’s sale 
and the deed by yourself to Dr. O’Reilly ; I mean who was 
the agent who did the actual collecting of the rents ? A. 
Lancaster & Tiernan were the agents of Dr. O’ Reilly in that 
time. 

Q. Were they the agents of R. D. Lancaster in any sense 
during the same period for the collection of those rents ? 
A. My recollection is that the rents were collected for the 
purpose of paying the interest, taxes, repairs, etc., and in¬ 
surance. 

[Question repeated.] A. Well, now, I can’t say yes to 
that, for the reason that I can’t recollect it as a positive 
fact; I know the interest was so much : I know I had to pay 
the interest, my share of it; I was responsible, supposed to 
be resiDonsible, for the half of that deed of trust, and I had 
to raise money for that very purpose. Where it came from 
I cannot answer at this time. 

Q. I am asking you for the time when, according to the 
records,'you had no title when it had been sold out by the 
United States Marshal to McDermott? A. I could not an¬ 
swer that question, because I don’t know how soon after the 
sale that it was sold to Dr. O’Reilly. 

Q. Well, before sold to Dr. O’Reilly? A. I can’t an¬ 
swer, as I tell you I don’t remember. 



156 


Q. Is it because you don’t know ? A. It is. 

Q. Your answer is you do not know ? A. It is ; I cannot 
answer positively. 

Q. Why if you had been sold out by the United States 
Marshal to McDermott did you give any deed to Dr. 
O’Reilly, or why was one necessary ; A. You will have to 
ask Dr. O’Reilly that question. 

Q. I am asking you the question, he is not here ? A. He 
asked me for it and I gave it to him. 

Q. Did he give you any reason ? A. I do not know now 
whether he did or not. 

Q. Or pay you any money ? A. No, sir ; I got no money 
for it. 

Q. Now, while McDermott ostensibly owned the property 
or really owned it as the case may be found to be, between 
the 1st of June, 1877, and the deed of August 31st, 1877, to 
Dr. O’Reilly, were any payments made for McDermott by 
any person to your knowledge, you or your partner, for in¬ 
stance ? A. I could not answer that question. 

Q. Mr. Lancaster, have you, since you were notified that 
you would be examined, made any inquiry or examined your 
books in regard to these transactions ? A. No, sir ; I have 
not in regard to that. ‘ 

Q. Your oooks show the disposition of the rents, do they 
not? A. I think so. 

Q. Why have you not looked at them in order to inform 
yourself ? A. It was not necessary as I know of. 

Q. Do you mean by that you saw no reason why you 
should know anything about it ? A. I didn’t say that. 

Q. It cannot understand your answer ? A. 1 said it was 
not necessary to look. 

Q. Did you think you would remember; is that the idea ? 
A. I didn’t thing so, I didn’t say so. 

Q. How much did Mr. O’Reilly pay you for your quit¬ 
claim deed for the property ? A. Nothing. 

Q. Do you state you do not know when your mortgage to 
the Connecticut Mutual was paid off ? A. I do. 

Q. Can’t you approximate ? A. I cannot. 

Q. Within a year? A. No, sir. 

Q. What was the value of that property at the time the 
mortgage was put upon it ? A. That is pretty hard to say. 

Q. Well, are you a real estate man ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know the value of property as a rule ? A. 
Yery well. 


157 


Q. You owned the x>roperty yourself once ? A. Yes, sir ; 
part owner. 

Q. You mortgaged it for $40,000 ? A. Yes, sir ; but the 
$40,000 was not given on the value of the property alto¬ 
gether. 

Q. I do not understand you ? A. It was given on the 
credit of the signers of the note more than on the property. 

Q. Who signed the note ? A. Dr! Thomas O’Reilly and 
myself. 

Q. Do you mean your personal endorsement counted for 
more than the property ? A. It was supposed to be the case 
at that time. 

Q. Was McDermott married ? A. I think not. 

Q. Are you positive ? A. I am not. 

Q. How long before you passed that deed to Dr. O’Reilly 
was it understood that Dr. O’ Reilly owned the whole prop¬ 
erty between you and Dr. O’Reilly? A. There was no 
understanding about it prior to the time I passed the deed. 

Q. Was it not so understood as soon as McDermott passed 
the deed to Dr. O’Reilly on August 31st, 1877? A. Was 
not that the same time I gave the deed ? 

Q. According to the record you did not give yours until 
September 20th, 21 days. A. What was the other date ? 

Q. August 31st of the same year ? A. I can’t tell why it 
was not the same time. That would be my recollection, that 
it was the same time. 

Q. What do you know about the deed of McDermott to 
Dr. O’Reilly ? A. What do I know about it ? Ido not un¬ 
derstand the question. 

Q. What do you know about the occasion when it was 
given? Did you suggest it to McDermott that it should be 
given? A. I don’t know whether I did or not. 

Q. Did you have any talk with McDermott about it ? A. 
I can’t say now whether I did or not. 

Q. Did Tiernan? I don’t know whether he did. If he 
did, he can speak for himself. 

Q. Did you write any letter to McDermott? A. No, sir. 

Q. Or get any letter from him about it ? A. Not that I 
know of. 

Q. Where was the deed made ? A. I presume it was made 
here. 

Q. In what part of the city ? A. I could not answer the 
question. 

Q. Was it made in your office ? A. I could not say. 

Q. Will you swear you never saw it about the time it was 


158 


made i A. I do not remember making the deed or seeing it 
being made, or whether it was in my office. 

Q. Did you draw any deeds yourself about that time ? A. 
I drew a good many. 

Q. Is it possible you drew this one ? A. It may be. I 
drew a good many deeds during my business as real estate 
agent since 1860. 

Q. Did your firm represent McDermott during the short 
time he owned the property—were you the agent for the 
property ? A. Now, I can’t understand—I can’t say whether 
we were or not. 

Q. Are you still the agent ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Was your agency for the property interrupted between 
the time you got the property and the time you gave the 
deed to Dr. O’ Reilly ? Were you agents up to that time ? 
A. I can’t say. 

Q. You don’t know anything about it ? A. No, sir; I don’t 
remember the date. 

Q. On what system do you keep your books ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question, and the com¬ 
missioner sustains the objection.] 

Q. Will your books show whether you were or not the 
agent of McDermott during that time ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question for the reason 
that the books will speak for themselves; objection over¬ 
ruled.] 

A. I do not know whether they will or not. 

Q. You are still in active prosecution of the same business 
under the same firm-name, are you not? A. No, sir. 

Q, Are you not partners now ? A. I am partner, but I 
am not attending to the business at all since I was appointed 
surveyor of the port. 

Q. You were up to the time of your appointment? A. 
Up to the time of my appointment I was engaged actively in 
the business. I have not spent ten minutes a day in the of¬ 
fice since; I sometimes go there, but do no work. 

Q. Have you forgotten how the books of the firm were 
kept ? A. I have. The fact is, I did not keep the books 
myself. Mr. Tiernan was the bookkeeper, and he did the 
office work, and I did the outside work. 

Q. You never saw the books then, very probably? A. 
Yes, sir; I have seen them all. 

Q. You did not see them often perhaps ? A. No, sir. 


159 


Q. Not enough to know much about it ? A. I didn’t see 
them sufficiently ; I didn’t keep the books. 

Q. You didn’t see them often enough to know how they 
were kept about a thing of this kind ? A. Not in this in¬ 
stance, I don’t think I looked. 

Q. Not in this instance ; you do not know whether the 
books will show when the same man is a tenant, the firm has 
an account on the books or not ? A. I don’t understand. 

Q. You do not know whether when a man is a patron of 
the firm whether he is on the books or not ? A. I am satis¬ 
fied the books show that. 

Q. If he is a patron of the firm his account appears on 
the books? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The entries of disbursements on his account and pay¬ 
ments to him, etc. ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you buy some property from John Keren and wife 
on the east line of Center street in this city ? A. I did, I 
bought it under a deed of trust. 

Q. Sometime in 1873 you bought, according to the record ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. According to the record, about March 1st, 1875, for a 
consideration of $2,000, that property was conveyed by 
yourself and wife to James Laughlin ; do you recollect that 
deed ? A. Not specially, I do not. 

Q. Do you recollect the transaction at all? A. Yes, I 
know I sold to Lauglin. 

Q. Who was Laughlin ? A. I could not tell you who he 
was. I was not acquainted with him up to that time. 

Q. What do you know of him now as to who he was ? 
A. I don’t know anything about him now. 

Q. Where does he live ? A. I think he is dead. 

Q. Did you ever see him ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you see him ? A. I saw him in my office. 

Q. Did he have an agent at that time ? A. I could not 
say whether he did or not. 

Q. Did you get the money, $2,000 for that deed? A. I 
did. 

Q. In cash? A. I don’t know whether cash or note ; I 
don’t think It was cash. 

Q. How was it paid, if you remember ? A. I could not 
tell without reference to the deed. The deed will show it. 

Q. There appears a deed March 1st, 1875, to R. D. Lan¬ 
caster’s trustees, do you remember that deed of trust of the 
same date? A. Not specially. 

Q. Don’t you remember whether he gave you a mortgage 


160 


for the purchase money ? A. He gave a deed of trust for 
the balance of the purchase money; but whether I remember 
its exact condition. 

Q. Have you told me all you know about James Laughlin ? 
A. All you have asked me about him. 

Q. What else do you know that I have not asked you l 
A. I don’t know. 

Q. Was he a particular friend of yours ? A. No, sir. 

Q. How long had you known him before you sold the 
property to him ? A. I could not answer you the question; 
I don’t think it was very long. 

Q. Was he or his wife related to either you or your wife ? 
A. They were not. 

Q. Were they related to any attorney of yours ? A. Not 
that I know of. 

Q. You don’t know whether they were or not ? A. I don’t 
know whether they were or not. 

Q. He had the same name as your present attorney ; were 
they related ? A. I cannot answer the question. 

Q. How long ago did he die ? A. That I could not tell 
you. 

Q. Approximate it ? A. I can’t. 

Q. When did you last hear of him alive ? A. That I 
could not answer. 

Q. How do you know he is dead ? A. I have been told so.. 

Q. By whom ? A. Well, I could not tell you by whom. 

Q. How long ago? A. Sometime ago. 

Q. A year? A. More .than that. 

Q. Two ? A. I could not answer. 

Q. Three ? A. I could not give you dates. 

Q. Hid he die in the city here ? A. I think so. 

Q. Who was your trustee when he made the mortgage to 
you March 1st, 1875 ? A. I could not answer, the deed will 
show that. 

Q. Whom was the note made to, do you remember ? A. 
I don’t know that. 

Q. Ho you remember some property on Thirteenth street 
and Clark avenue that was also bought by you of John Keren 
and wife about the same time in 1873, I think the same date, 
exactly, the record seems to show; do you remember that 
property ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Hid you own that at the time you gave this bond ? A. 

I did. \ 

Q. Ho you remember to whom you conveyed that prop¬ 
erty ? A. I could not tell now without looking at the record- 


161 


Q. Was it Ed Butler ? A. Yes, Ed Butler; I conveyed 
part of it to Butler, and I think I sold part of it to another 
party, I think it was John Lady "bought the other part of it. 

Q. According to the record, 40 feet on the west line of 
Thirteenth street by 70 feet, beginning 203 feet north of 
Clark avenue, was conveyed by you to Ed Butler upon the 
15th of December, 1875, for a stated consideration of $3,500. 
Now, on the same day Ed Butler executed a deed of trust 
to your trustee, Henry D. Laughlin. Do you remember the 
deed of trust being executed back ? A. Not specially. 

Q. Have you any recollection of it ? A. I assume it is all 
right. A deed of trust was made. I don’t know specially 
whether these are the dates or not. 

Q. According to the record, that deed of trust was paya¬ 
ble in three notes each for $1,000, payable in six, twelve 
and eighteen months after date. That deed of trust re¬ 
mained six years overdue, do you remember why that was % 
A. I could not say positively—not just now. 

Q. Well, can you give us any explanation of that trans¬ 
action ? A. No, sir; I could not positively state why it was 
laid over that long. 

Q. Did you acquire the property back from Butler? A. 
I did. 

Q. What did you pay him for it? A. I could not say 
what I paid; my recollection is I took the property back on 
some understanding or other. 

Q. What understanding ? A. Some understanding, I can’t 
give now, specially. 

Q. Did that understanding exist when you gave him the 
deed ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Did it exist at any time before you got it back ? A. 
No, sir ; my recollection is there was no understanding un¬ 
til that time, I suppose. 

Q. Your recollection is there was no understanding until 
that time ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. When you got back the property did you give him 
back the deed of trust and notes ? A. I expect I did. 

Q. You know you did. A. That is my recollection. 

Q. Do you remember the time you got back the property ? 
A. No, I can’t give you the date. 

Q. About A}3ril 4th, 1883, the record says. Now how 
did you happen to get the property back at that time ? A. 
got it back, I suppose because Butler did not pay the amount 
of the consideration of the deed for it. 

Q. Did you press him very hard for the money ? A. I 


162 


don’t know about that. He didn’t have the money. It did 
not turn out as he expected as I understood him. 

Q. Hid he ever pay any*interest on it? A. Yes, he paid- 
interest on it. 

Q. How much? A. I could not say that. 

Q. When ? A. I could not give the date. 

Q. Check, draft or cash ? A. That I could not give you. 

Q. Ed. Butler is the man who married your cousin I be¬ 
lieve ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Hid you ever hear of a firm called “Me and Hick?” 
A. I never did. 

Q. Never saw it in the newspaper ? A. Yes, I saw it in 
the newspaper. 

Q. Is that Butler the same man who was a member of that 
firm ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question ; objection sus¬ 
tained.] ? 

Q. What have been the personal relations between you and 
Butler during the past year, whether close or otherwise ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question as having been 
asked and answered ; objection overruled.] 

A. I didn’t have any 1 personal relations with him at any 
time any more than I had a hundred other citizens, a thous¬ 
and others so far as that is concerned. 

Q. With that explanation were they close or otherwise ? 
A. No, sir ; they were not close anymore than they are 
with a great many other citizens. 

Q. Hid you have close relations with other citizens that 
you speak of ? A. I don’t know that I did specially. 

Q. What were the political relations between you and 
Butler at that time, pretty close ? A. No, they were not. 

Q. Neither the personal relations or political relations 
were close at that time ? A. Butler and myself were op¬ 
posed at that time and prior to that time politically, that 
is opposed to men for nominations, etc. 

Q. I ask you whether you testify that your personal re¬ 
lations were not close with Butler about the time the deeds 
were made or before ? A. 1 say politically they were not. 

Q. Or personally ? A. That deed was made when ? 

Q. According to the record Becember 15th, 1875 ? A. 
Well, prior to that time our relations were not friendly po¬ 
litically. He, as a general thing, was opposed to my friends 
when looking for office although in that year, in 1875 I, re- 


163 


member very well lie did support the nomination of Arthur 
Barrett against Overstolz the first time we agreed. 

Q. You were agreeing at that time \ A. In the first in¬ 
stance. 

Q. You both belonged to the Barrett Organization % A. 
Yes, sir ; the Barrett caucuses, whatever you may call it. 

Q. When Butler gave you back the property, and you gave 
him back the notes he had given for it, did you give him back 
the interest he had paid % A. No, sir. 

Q. You kept that; how much did you keep ? A. I could 
not say. 

Q. Who paid taxes on it in the meantime, while nominally 
in his name or actually in his name \ A. I could not say ; 
I suppose he did. 

Q. What do you know about it ? A. I could not say pos¬ 
itively. 

Q. Bo you swear you did pay them ? A. I would not say 
that, although it may be charged up against the property. 

Q. You mean on the books of Lancaster & Tiernan \ A. 
It may be. 

Q. Were the firm agents for the property during that 
time l A. They were. Let me see—we became the agents 
for Butler, with other property about that time. 

Q. You collected the rents ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you got a receipt in your office from Butler for 
the rents paid ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How do know ? A. Because I have seen him sign re¬ 
ceipts. 

Q. For this property ? A. I don’t know specially for this; 
I have seen him sign them. 

Q. Including this ? A. I have seen receipts signed by 
him. 

Q. I ask about this property ? A. I can’t answer speci¬ 
ally about this property. 

Q. Were the rents applied to pay the interest on the 
notes ? A. I can’t say whether they were or were not. 

Q. Have you in your books a full record of that transac¬ 
tion \ A. That I could not say whether a full record is 
there or not that would show it. 

Q. Who was present when the mortgage arid notes were 
handed back by you to Butler % A. I could not say. 

Q. Anybody % A. I could not say. 

Q. You cannot say how much money you made out of the 
transaction in the way of interest, can you ? A. No, sir; 
I could not. 


164 


Q. Did the interest equal the taxes paid meanwhile ? A. 
Did what ? 

Q. Did the interest that you retained equal the taxes 
paid on the property in the meantime? A. The interest 
was more than the taxes. 

Q. How do you know ? A. I know the taxes were— 

Q. I mean the interest you retained ? A. I could not say 
because the taxes were not as much as the interest by a 
good deal. 

Q. But you said just now that Butler wanted you to take 
the property back because it had not turned out as he ex¬ 
pected—did you say that ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you in that habit of taking property back because 
it doesn’t turn out as the purchaser expects ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question; objection 
sustained.] 

Q. Was that your sole reason for taking the property 
back, because he said it didn’t turn out as he expected ? 
A. I could not answer that positively whether it was or not. 

Q. Do you know whether it had diminished in value or 
not during that time, do you know of your own knowledge ? 
A. It had. 

Q. How much approximately ? A. Considerably. I don’t 
know though, I could not say now, it is pretty hard to tell 
what it was worth. 

Q. Was there anything about the original bargain that 
was unfair on your part—the agreement of sale ? A. I 
think not; I required money, and wanted to sell, and sold 
it to him and got the notes, etc. 

Q. How much money did he pay cash at that time—at the 
time he bought the jjroperty ? A. $500, I think. 

Q. Did he get that back ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Neither directly nor indirectly ? A. I think not. 

Q. Did he pay it by check ; if, so, on what bank, if you 
remember ? A. I could not say. 

Q. Whether he paid check or cash ? A. I could not say 
whether by check or cash, it is so long ago. 

Q. What was the property worth at that time ? A. I con¬ 
sidered it worth $3,500 at that time, but it turned out not 
to be worth that much. 

Q. You considered it worth $3,500, you say ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. According to your testimony, you sold it for $4,000 ? 
A. No ; I think $3,500. 



165 


Q. Are you pretty positive about that ? A. That is my 
recollection. 

Q. Didn’t you say he paid you $500 cash ; there is no 
doubt about that proposition ? A. That is my recollection; 
he paid $500. I think it was $3500 in the deed. 

Q. And gave a mortgage for the balance ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. According to the record, he gave a mortgage for $3,- 
500 ? A. I could not say whether $3,500 or $3,000; I thought 
it was $3,000. 

Q. I may be mistaken, as I may be confounding the war¬ 
ranty deed with the other ? A. As I said before, the deed 
will show for itself. Your resolutions offered to the House, 

I do not take as correct. 

Q. How is that? A. What you are reading from, your 
resolutions to the House are not correct. 

Q. Turning to the record made by Sterling & Webster, 

and I am following it- A. I don’t know whether you 

are or not. 

Q, How did your partner, Joe Tiernan, turn up as owner 
of the mortgage that Butler gave you ? A. He owned it. I 
transferred it to him. 

Q. What for ? A, For the purpose of raising money to 
pay off my debts. 

Q. When ? A. At or about that time. 

Q. About the time it was made ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did he hold it ? A. That I could not say. 

Q. These advances were made to you by the firm of Lan¬ 
caster and Tiernan, I understood you to say ? A. The ad¬ 
vances were made out of moneys- 

Q. Belonging to the firm ? No, sir; not belonging to the 
firm. 

Q. Belonging to whom ? A. In the name of the firm, be¬ 
longing to our customers. 

Q. Borrowed by you from your customers on mortgages 
that you gave ? A. Not directly from customers; no, sir. 

Q. Indirectly from customers? A. Yes, sir. 

Q, Please explain that ? A. I have. 

Q. You can’t explain it any further? A. Yot that I 
know of. 

Q. Do you mean to say you loaned yourself money of 
your customers on this mortgage of Butler’s? A. I mean 
to say Lancaster & Tiernan did. 

Q.' Lancaster & Tiernan loaned to a member of the firm 
money of their customers on a mortgage of one member of 
the firm? A. Yes, sir. 




166 


Q. And that mortgage approached within $500 the value 
of the property on which it was given, didn’t it according 
to your statement ? A. That is correct. 

Q. The J. H. Tiernan then that turned up as owner of the 
mortgage and satisfied it eventually was the same gentleman 
of whom you have been speaking as your partner, was he 
not ? A. He was. He was my partner at that time. 

Q. He is now, is he not ? A. He is. 

Q. In the other cases where you have previously stated 
that the loans were pledged, that the mortgages were pledged 
with the firm for money ; was it the money of customers 
that was being used in that way? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With their assent I suppose? A. Well, I don’t know 
that they all assented to it or not. 

Q. You do not mean to say you would do it without their 
assent ? A. I mean to say the money was used that way, 
and these people all got their money from Lancaster & 
Tiernan. I do not owe anybody. 

Q. You do not mean to say you would take their money 
from the firm without their assent ? A. I don’t know why. 

Q. I)o you say so ? A. I didn’t say so. 

Q. Did you or did you not have the assent of the ciis- 
tomers for the application of their money that way ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question, and the com¬ 
missioner sustains the objection, and defendant’s counsel 
asks to withdraw the question for the present to be asked 
again and certified to the court.] 

Q. Do you remember owning some property which you 
acquired from Thomas Ames and . Elizabeth, his wife," on 
Eighth street and Carr street ? Did you own that at the 
time the bond was given to the Government on account of 
John Busby ? A. It was in my name. 

Q. You owned it, didn’t you ? A. I did. 

Q,. On June 11th, 1874, there appears of record a deed of 
trust given to you by A. W. Meade’s trustee to secure a 
note of $11,887.20 ; I think that is the same deed of trust 
we examined you about yesterday ? A. Under the same cir¬ 
cumstances. 

Q. It covers several pieces of property ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is not the same property ; I think it is a different 
piece of property. Now, was that property improved or 
unimproved ? A. The property was improved ; it had shells 
of houses. 

Q. It bore rent ? A. A very little rent. 


167 


Q. What agent collected the rent ? A. Lancaster & Tier- 
nan collected the rents. 

Q. Do they still collect them ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And they have uninterruptedly from that time to this? 
A. I think so. 

Q. Who received the rents ; I don’t mean who collected 
them ;. to whose credit were they put.? A. Put to my credit 
during the time I owned it. 

A. After the foreclosure of the deed of trust, on May 
14th, 1877, to whose credit were they put ? A. They were 
put to the credit of the owner ; I think it was James Tier- 
nan. 

Q. James Tiernan is the same James Tiernan of whom we 
have spoken, who is a brother of your business partner ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. After they were put to the credit of James Tiernan did 
he give them to you—in the first place did the firm pay them 
to James Tiernan ? A. I don’t know how that matter was 
fixed or what determination was made of the rents. I think 
they went to pay ground rent, interest and taxes—taxes I 
should have said, and repairs. 

Q. Will you say that James Tiernan did not receive any 
money over interest and taxes ? A. I cannot say. I will 
have to refer to Mr. Tiernan, he can tell, as he kept the 
books. The fact is, I left the whole matter to my j>artner 
at that time; I paid very little attention to it. 

Q. Whether you received any benefit directly or indirectly 
by way of rent and income from the property after it was 
sold by the marshal in June, 1877, up to the time you re¬ 
acquired it in 1888, please answer yes or no ? A. I could 
not answer. 

Q. Could not answer yes or no ? A. Not just now. 

Q, Do not know whether you did or not, is that your 
answer? A. I have answered that. 

Q. You don’t know whether you did or did not? A. I 
could not answer whether I did or not. 

Q. You don’t know whether you did or not, is that it? 
A. Yes. 

Q. There was a deed of trust given May 17th, 1877, to se¬ 
cure $9,500 for three years with six interest notes. I think 
that was gone into yesterday ; was not that on several pieces 
of property ? A. That was one transaction, the whole thing. 

Q. That mortgage to L. Freeman, trustee, included anum- 
ber of pieces of property ? A. It did. 


168 


Q. Did you get any part of that money, $9,500, raised on 
that note ? A. I did. 

Q. How much of it ? A. On which note ? 

Q. Of James Tiernan to L. Freeman, trustee ? A. I didn’t 
get any of it. 

Q. Is that a misprint for anybody else ; do you know the 
trustee in that deed of trust ? A. I do not know. 

Q. Was it Tiernan, perhaps ? A. I could not say whether 
he was or not. 

Q. On the 21st day of June, 1877, that property was sold 
by the United States Marshal to James Tiernan according 
to the record for $20. At that time the $9,000 with interest 
was an encumbrance on it, was it not ? A. I don’t under¬ 
stand the question. 

Q. At the time of the Marshal’s sale had the mortgage 
been satisfied or paid off ? A. I don’t know, I can’t answer 
that, whether it was or not. 

Q. You re-acquired that property didn’t you ? A. I did. 

Q. Do you own it now ? A. I do. 

Q. When did you re-acquire it? A. I could not give 
you the date, the deeds will show it. 

Q. Was it about the time you re-acquired all the other prop¬ 
erty ? A. I don’t know wliat other property you refer to. 

Q. I will call your attention now to it. The property 
you conveyed to Butler you re-acquired April 4, 1883 ; the 
property on Eighth street and Carr you re-acquired accord¬ 
ing to the record, April 4th, 1883 ; the property on Eighth 
and Carr you re-acquired April 9th, 1883 ; the property in 
Dean’s addition, on Lucas Avenue, half of lot 2 of block 1 
of Dean’s addition you. re-acquired after a similar history 
on April 4th, 1883 ; the proj>erty in Block 577 on Eleventh 
street you re-acquired on April 4th, 1883 ; the property in 
City Block 972 Thomas street and Elliott Avenue, you re¬ 
acquired April 4th, 1883. Now I ask you whether you re¬ 
acquired the property I am examining you about at the 
same time you re-acquired this property, as the record said 
you did—is the record correct ? A. I can’t say whether 
the record is correct or not. That is not the record you are 
reading from. 

Q. It is a printed copy of it ? A. I don’t know whether 
it is or not. 

Q. Do you know when you got it back ? A. I could tell 
by the deed. 

Q. Do you know how you came to get it all back at that 
time ? A. That is the property that James Tiernan bought. 


169 


Q. I don’t know whether it passed through Janies Tier- 
nan ? A. I suppose that is why that came back at the same 
time. 

Q. What did you pay James Tiernan for that deed that 
you got on April 4th, 1883 ? A. I do not remember how the 
payment was made at that time. 

Q. Did you pay him anything for it ? A. That I could 
not say at that time, whether it was made at that time or 
not. 

Q. At any time ? A. Yes; I must have, some way or 
other. Joe Tiernan can tell. 

Q. Can you tell ? A. Not just now. » 

Q. How does it happen that he can tell, and you not ? A. 
For the simple reason he managed the whole transaction. 

Q. Have you no recollection of it ? A. I have a recollec¬ 
tion of his management of the matter after the property was 
sold, and Tiernan got it, and got the money it was sold for 
under the deed of trust. 

Q. How much did you get ? A. I think $9,500. 

Q. You got it in cash ? A. I did. 

Q. When did you get that in cash ? A. At the time of 
the sale. 

Q. What was the time of the sale ? A. That I could not 
tell you, the date. 

Q. The time of the sale by whom ? A. Joe Tiernan. 

Q. Under the mortgage ? A. Under the mortgage. 

Q. You got $9,500 ? A. I think that is the amount, the 
amount it was sold at. 

Q. Joe paid you that in cash, did he? A. No; it was 
Jim, I guess. 

Q. Jim paid you that in cash ? A. Yes. 

Q. Or in check? A. No ; I think it was in cash. 

Q. Where? A. It must have been at the office when he 
got the deed. 

Q. Did the firm of Lancaster & Tienan advance the 
money for it? A. No, sir. 

Q. Tiernan advanced it himself? A. No, sir. 

Q. Who advanced it? A. I could not tell you where 
Tiernan got the money. 

Q. Who handed it to you, Tiernan? A. That is my 
recollection. 

Q. He advanced it, so far as you know? A. I mean 
James Tiernan. 

Q. So far as you know, James Tiernan advanced it ? A. 
Yes, sir. 


170 


Q. Have you any reason to suppose anybody else ad¬ 
vanced it? A. No, sir. 

Q. Was Janies Tiernan a member of the firm ? A. No, 
sir. 

Q. No connection with it? A. No, sir; none whatever. 

Q, You had no other parties than yourself and Joe 
Tiernan interested in the business at that time ? No, sir. 

Q. Do I understand that you do not remember whether 
you paid James Tiernan any money when he conveyed the 
property back to you, is that your statement ? A. That is 
my statement. 

Q. Yet you say he paid you $9,500 for it ? A. I do. 

Q. You do not remember whether you paid him anything 
for it ? A. I do not remember the amount or time. 

Q. Or whether you paid him anything ? A. The trans¬ 
action occurred between Joe Tiernan and James Tiernan. 

Q. How was that, how could the transaction occur be¬ 
tween them which gave you the property ? A. That is my 
recollection of it, that Tiernan managed that thing. 

Q. You were getting the property, were you not ? A. At 
the time of the sale, no, Tiernan got it. 

Q. At the time James Tiernan conveyed to you, that is 
what I am asking you about ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether you paid him any money or 
not ? A. Mr. Tiernan fixed that matter. 

Q. Joe fixed it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. If he got the money he did not get it from you ? A. 
No, sir ; I won’t say that. 

Q. If he got the money did he get it from you ? A. He 
must have, that is my recollection of it. 

Q. Did you furnish him the money in cash ? A. That is 
my recollection, I must have. 

Q. Have you any recollection or is it an inference ? A. 
Yes, sir ; not specially. 

Q. What do you mean by specially, only partially? A. 
I don’t remember about it. 

Q. You don’t remember at all A. No, I remember he 
managed the whole transaction for me. 

Q. Why ? A. Because it was' necessary he should, for 
his interest and mine that he should. 

Q. Why was it for his interest and yours necessary that 
he should? A. I cannot answer the question. 

Q. You have said it was for your interest and his interest. 
A. It was for the interest in the firm. 


171 


Q. Was he acting for the firm? A. For himself, in the 
first place. 

Q. Who did he act for in the second place ? A. For his 
brother. 

Q. Yon got the property back ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And whether a dollar was paid James Tiernan you 
don’t know ? A. I am satisfied he got his money back. 

Q. How do you know ? A. From what Mr. Tiernan told 
me. 

Q. Tiernan told you, did he ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did Joe call on you to refund the money he advanced 
James? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. How came your property bought back without your 
knowing more about it than this; did you say you wanted 
it bought back? A. I can’t remember the particular cir¬ 
cumstances. I think I have told you all the particulars and 
circumstances connected with the transaction. 

Q. That the property was sold, and Tiernan paid the cash 
to you ? A. To me, and afterwards Tiernan got hold of it. 

Q. Did James Tiernan get his money back immediately 
after he paid it to you ? A. I could not say whether he did 
or not just now. 

Q. He paid it to you, according to your testimony, May 
14th, 1877 ; you didn’t get the property back ? A. I don’t 
know whether that is the date he paid it or not. 

Q. According to the record, you did not get the property 
back until 1883. I am asking you whether the $9,500 that 
you say James Tiernan paid you when he got the property 
was returned at the time to him immediately by you ? A. 
can’t say whether it was or not. 

Q. Will you testify positively that James Tiernan ever 
got a dollar for conveying the property to you of your own 
knowledge ? A. Of my own knowledge I could not testify 
positively, because I did not pay it myself. My recollection 
is Joe Tiernan did. 

Q. Could you testify he ever paid you a dollar when the 
prop erty was foreclosed and conveyed to him ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many dollars ? A. The amount it brought at the 
sale. 

Q. I thought you said it was paid in cash ? A. In cash 
or check, I can’t remember which, I think cash. 

Q. Did it go to your private bank account ? A. It must 
have been deposited in bank. 

Q. In your private bank account ? A. I had no private 
account then. 



172 


Q. In Lancaster & Tiernan’s ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In the firm account ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There would be entries in their book showing the trans¬ 
action ? A. I expect so. 

Q. Have you ever seen them ? A. I don’t remember. 

Q. Have you got your books of that date ? A. I think so. 

Q. Ho doubt about it? A. I don’t think there is. 

Q. Hid you buy from Joseph H. Tiernan certain property 
on Eighth and Carr at any time ? A. I think I did. 

Q. When was it, do you remember ? A. I do not. 

Q. Was it not about March 1st, 1876, somewhere along 
there ? A. I could not say whether it was that late or not. 

Q. Was it several years ago or only one ? A. I could not 
say. 

Q. Was it fifty years ago ? A. Yo, sir. 

Q. Ten years ? A. I could not buy anything before I was 
born. 

Q. Was it ten years ago? A. I could not tell you. It 
was a short time ago, not very long ago, I could not give 
you the dates. 

Q. Was it only a year ago ? A. I could not say a year 
or three or two now, without referring to my other books. 

Q. What books ? A. Without referring to the deeds, I 
do not carry those things in my mind, as long as they go on 
the record that ends it. 

Q. Hid Tiernan acquire the property from you before he 
conveyed it to you ? A. Yo, sir. 

Q. Is it not property covered by the mortgage ? A. What, 
Eighth street property ? 

Q. I will read : 20 feet on the east line of Eighth street, 
by a depth of 127 feet 6 inches to an alley, beginning 110 
feet, more or less, north of Carr street; J. H. Tiernan, sin¬ 
gle, to Richard H. Lancaster, quit claim March 1st, 1886, 
consideration $10, book 789, page 2. I notice the property 
we have been examining about is on Eighth and Carr ? A. 
This is a piece adjoining the other piece. 

Q. It had also been owned by you at one time, I under¬ 
stood you to say ? A. Yo, it never had. 

Q. How did Tiernan come to convey it by quit-claim deed 
to you for $10 ? A. For a consideration of the amount he 
owed me. 

Q. How much did he owe you ? A. That is a question I 
can’t tell exactly, matters between him and me. In settle¬ 
ment of our partnership affairs he deeded me a house and 
lot. 



173 


Q. Yon had a settlement of your partnership affairs at 
that time ? A. Must have had. 

Q. Do you remember anything about it? A. We must 
have had at that time. That is why it was done. 

Q. Do you remember about it ? A. Nothing more than 
the transaction occurred. 

Q. You remember you did have a settlement of the part¬ 
nership accounts at that time ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question ; objection 
sustained.] 

Q. Did the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan ever own it ? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Tiernan own it on account of the firm or hold 
it for the firm ? Tile firm owned nearly all the property at 
one time ? A. That is not true ; the firm never owned any 
property. 

[The commissioner states he sustains the objection.] 

Q~ Do you remember buying some property from Adams 
and wife sometime in 1863 on Lucas avenue and Sixteenth? 
A. You got into all of that yesterday. 

Q. Do you remember of buying from Caulkin and wife 
certain property on the east line of Eleventh street in the 
west half of block 27, city block 577; it seems to be away 
back in 1866 or 1867 ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You owned that property at the time you went on the 
bond ? A. Yes, sir ; that was all gone into. It is the same 
piece of property on Eleventh street. It is in the deed that 
Tiernan bought. 

Q. It is the same deed, but I don’t think you were exam¬ 
ined about that particular piece. The deed to Meade is only 
a part of the history of it. That was conveyed to A. W. 
Meade’s trustee, June 11th, 1874, by mortgage, and the 
history of that you gave yesterday ? A. Yes, sir ; it was 
in the same deed of trust, the one you have talked about 
now for three hours. 

Q. On April 24th, 1866, you gave a d«ed to James Ennis, 
trustee, and Joseph O’Neill in regard to which you were 
examined yesterday ? A. The same property. 

Q. Covering another piece of property ? A. It is the same 
property. 

Q. I do not think we have examined you about that piece ? 
A. Yes, sir, Christy avenue and Thomas street. There were 
four pieces in that deed that vou have been talking about 
for several hours. 


174 


Q. The particular mortgage recurs on different pieces of 
property, but the history is different after the foreclosure ?' 
A. They are the same exactly. 

Q. I will examine you about this because the short-hand 
reporter looked up the pieces and it is not in there, and my 
recollection is the same as his report. This appears to have 
been sold under the foreclosure on May 4th, 1877, of the 
mortgage to Ennis, trustee, to James Tiernan ? A. It is the 
same property, I tell you. 

Q, How much did Tiernan pay you for that property when 
he bought at foreclosure sale ? A. The amount I just stated 
a while ago. 

Q. How much is that ? A. The amount the property 
brought at that sale. 

Q. How much was that? A. This is included; I think it 
is $9,500. 

Q. Here it says $8,200. Ho you mean to say that is a part 
going to make up the $9,500. A. I do not. Your records 
are wrong. You are going on something that is not true if 
you are reading correctly. I do not know whether you are 
or not. 

Q. I am not asking you about the record ? A. I tell you 
you are mistaken in the proposition that you are making. 
It is not true. 

Q. Let me appeal to your recollection. How much did 
Mr. Tiernan pay you for this particular piece of property ? 
A. I could not tell you. That is all included with other 
pieces. 

Q. Was it all sold in bulk? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. All the pieces put together in one sale, and one amount 
paid for the whole of them? A. I think so; that is my re¬ 
collection. 

Q. This property was conveyed by James Tiernan to L. 
Freeman, trustees, to secure as principal $9,500, due in three 
years, with six interest notes. That, according to the record, 
was satisfied by Joseph H. Tiernan on April 13th, 1888. 
Now, we have examined you before about the satisfaction 
of that mortgage, but on June 21st, 1877, what mortgage 
was on the property ? It was sold to James Tiernan for $20 
by the Marshal. Ho you remember that transaction ? A. 
Not specially; no, sir. I know it was sold by the Marshal. 

Q. Were you there at the sale ? A. I think I was. 

Q. When James Tiernan paid for the property $20, did 
he get other property for the same $20 ? Hid the $20 cover 
other pieces of property ? A. I canH answer that question. 


175 


Q. You do not remember whether you were present at the 
sale or not ? A. (Continuing.) Because I don’t know whether 
it sold for $20 or not. 

Q. Were you present at the Marshal’s sale ? A. I was. 

Q. Who else was present ? A. James Tiernan was pre¬ 
sent, Joe Tiernan was present, and McDermott was present. 

Q. I mean outside parties who appeared as purchasers 
there? A. I don’t think there was anybody except the 
United States Marshal and his deputy. 

Q. The piece of property was conveyed to you by James 
Tiernan according to the record April 4th, 1883. What did 
you pay him for it, if anything ? A. That is the same his¬ 
tory exactly as the balance; it came in with other pieces. 

Q. What did you pay him for those pieces, if anything ? 
A. I did’nt pay him anything; Joe Tiernan paid him. I 
can’t answer the question. 

Q. Did he pay him on your account ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is that all you know about it ? A. That is all. 

Q. Have you any papers detailing the transaction ? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Or any accounts ? A. I have not. 

Q. They appear in the partnership books ? A. That I do 
not know. 

Q. During the time the property was in the name of James 
Tiernan, did you receive any profit, rent or income from the 
property, directly or indirectly ? A. I do not think I did. 
I have answered that before. 

Q. Did James Tiernan receive any ? A. Not after he got 
his money back from Joe Tiernan. I don’t think the prop¬ 
erty brought sufficient income to pay the interest and taxes; 
that is my recollection now, without seeing Mr. Tiernan 
about it. 

Q. For the property you say Tiernan advanced $9,500 un¬ 
der the Ennis deed of trust; did’nt that come out of the firm 
of Lancaster & Tiernan in the end ? A. It finally came out 
of my fund after I had made sufficient to pay it back. 

Q. Did’nt it come out of the firm, and go to James Tier¬ 
nan before it came to you, to your knowledge ? A. It did’nt 
come out of the firm, because Tiernan did’nt have any money 
in the firm—any property in the firm. 

Q. You mean James Tiernan ? A. No, I mean Joe. 

Q. He didn’t have any property in the firm ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Then all the firm property belonged to you ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. When ? A. All the time. There was no firm property. 


176 


Q. What was it you were testifying belonged to yon \ A. 
The property belonged to me always. Mr. Tiernan never 
owned it. As I say, Mr. Tiernan had no capital in the firm. 

Q. All the capital belonged to you \ A. Whatever money 
he had in the firm he always took it out. I owned every¬ 
thing in the firm. 

Q. He drew so much from time to time as his share of the 
profits ? A. He drew out all his profits and mine remained 
always from the beginning to the end. 

Q. When James Tiernan advanced $9,500 was it not merely 
a loan to the firm, and so understood at the time ? A. It 
could not be a loan to the firm, because the firm did notown 
the property. 

Q. A loan to the firm on the property ? A. It could not 
be to the firm, because the firm did not own it. 

Q. Was it a loan to you ? A. It was not a loan, he bought 
it. 

Q. Wasn’t there an understanding that you should take 
it back % A. No, I don’t think there was at that time. 

Q. When was that understanding created ? A. There was 
not any understanding, as I understand the question. I think 
I have answered it. 

How long did the understanding ante-date the conveyance 
by James Tiernan back to you ? How long before he con¬ 
veyed it to you did you know he was going to do it ? A. I 
didn’t have the understanding with him about it. 

Q. Hid you go to him ? A. Mr, Tiernan went to him. 

Q. Without your authority ? A. I suppose he had my 
consent. 

Q. Hid he, or not \ A. Whatever he did, I suppose he 
did it with my consent. 

Q. Have you any recollection of giving him authority ? 
Gan you remember whether you did or not % A. Not spe¬ 
cially. 

Q. Generally ? A. I say generally or specially, I do not 
remember the exact circumstances or authority, as you call 
it. 

Q. Hoesn’t the statement that you owned all the capital 
of the firm apply to all the time you were doing business 
together ? A. Yes, sir ; it does. 

Q. Up to the present time ? A. It does. I was responsi¬ 
ble for all debts of the firm ; Tiernan put in his labor for an 
interest. 

Q. In the profits ? A. In the profits.' 


177 


Q. In the net or gross profits? A. In the profits of the 
concern. 

Q, Net or gross ? A. He had to pay his pro rata share 
of the expenses. 

Q. Do yon remember buying some property in Stoddard 
Addition, on Thomas and Elliott avenue, from John Walsh 
and wife, or rather from their trustees ? A. I do. 

Q. You owned that property when you went on this bond ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That was covered by the same deed of trust of April 
24th, 1876, to James Ennis and Joseph O’Neill, trustees, 
was it not ? A. I think it was. 

Q. It was foreclosed May 14tli, 1877, and sold to James 
Tiernan, was it not ? A. I think that is the date. 

Q. Do you remember the amount that Mr. Tiernan paid 
for it if he paid anything ? . A. $9,500 including all the 
other property in the deed. 

Q. This 89,500 paid for this with the other property? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. This seems to follow the same course, a mortgage for 
$9,500 being placed on it by James Tiernan to L. Freeman 
as trustee, and that mortgage being satisfied by Joe Tiernan, 
that is the same transaction ? A. The same transaction ex¬ 
actly. 

Q. James Tiernan also bought this at the marshal’s sale 
for a consideration of $20, and on April 4th, 1883, he con¬ 
veyed it to you according to the record. When he conveyed 
the property on April 4th, 1888, to you, were the several 
pieces or more conveyed as one transaction, or was each 
piece a separate transaction involving a separate negotia¬ 
tion ? A. It was one transaction. 

Q. Do you remember what you paid him for that particu¬ 
lar piece ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you remember what you paid him for all the pieces 
included in that deed ? A. I do not remember any more 
than I have told you in regard to the whole transaction. 

Q. Of which you consider this a part ? A. This is a part. 

Q. Do you remember buying a piece of property from 
William IT. Mason on January 10th, 1865, or about there 
somewhere for $500 on Second and Angelica ? do you re¬ 
member owning the property ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you own it at the time the bond was given ? A. I 
do not remember whether I did or not 

Q. Who was George P. Pendergrast. Do you know him ? 
A. I do. 


178 


Q. Did you know him in 1875, along there ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was he any relation of yours ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he live in St. Louis ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is he living ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where does he live ? A. He lives in the-city, in the 
boundaries of the city limits, is my recollection. 

Q. Is he the same man who run for sheriff once ? A. Yo, 
sir. 

Q. For marshal ? A. For marshal. 

Q. On the Democratic ticket ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who owns that property now ? A. I could not tell 
you. 

Q. Do you remember when G-raham Frost run for Con¬ 
gress in 1876 ? A. Yes, I have known him from the time 
he first run. 

Q. Were you living in his district in 1876 ? A. I never 
did live in his district. 

Q. That was the old third, the present eighth ? A. That 
is my present recollection. 

Q. Were you occupying an official position in the Demo¬ 
cratic party as committeeman at that time? A. In 1876, I 
think not. He run twice or three times, if I remember 
right. 

Q. In 1876 ? A. I was not in 1876 or 1878. 

Q. Do you remember having a conversation with Mr. Frost 
about money matters in relation to politics about that time ? 
A. I only had one conversation with Mr. Frost in regard to 
money matters in relation to his canvass. 

Q. When was that ? A. That was the time he was run¬ 
ning for Congress. 

Q. In 1876 or 1878 ? A. I could not tell whether 1876 or 
1878. 

Q. What was that conversation? A. Mr. Frost was a 
candidate for Congress, and he belonged to the same organ¬ 
ization .that was known, or nicknamed, at that time as the 
Dark Lantern Party. The members of his district were in 
favor of him for Congress and nominated him. In 1878 it 
was the same way, although there Tvas no organization then. 
I was his political friend, and he came to me about the time 
that he was assessed $1,500, and stated that was too much 
money for him to pay, that his other expenses would be a 
a good deal more, and that all he would be willing to pay 
would be $1,000, and wanted me to help him have it reduced 
to that sum, as his Congressional Committee had, at his 
suggestion, assessed him $1,000, and he wanted the Con- 


179 


gressional Committee to manage liis campaign instead of the 
City Committee. I told him at the time he was wrong in 
his ideas, that the Congressional Committee should manage 
his canq^aign, that they had never done it theretofore, and 
I advised him to pay the assessment to the Central Commit¬ 
tee. The $1,500 he considered was too much, and I did also. 
I understood, prior to that time, that the Congressional 
candidates were assessed $1,000 by the committee for cam¬ 
paign purposes. I advised him, if the amount would not 
be reduced according to his suggestion at the time—he 
wanted me to help do it—that it would be best for him to 
pay the $1,500 if he wanted to be elected, that if he did not 
pay the amount to the Central Committee, and they left his 
name off of the ticket, he could not be elected; that the Con¬ 
gressional Committee only had his name alone, and that 
would be a separate ticket. The matter was finally arranged 
and the amount reduced to $1,000. I helped him have it re¬ 
duced. At his suggestion I saw several of the members, and 
his own committee did not ask him to pay the $1,000. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with him in which the 
sum of $1,000, or $1,500, was named by you as a payment 
to be made by him to any person or persons prior to his 
nomination ? A. No, sir. 

Q. I understand you to state the conversation you have 
given was subsequent to the nomination ? A. After the 
nomination. 

Q. Prior to the nomination you had no conversation with 
him on money matters when a suggestion of a payment of 
$1,500, or about that sum, to be paid by him to any person 
was made? A. No, sir; that was the only conversation I 
had w T ith him. He came to my office to tell us about it, and 
asked me to try and help him have it reduced. I didn’t 
know he was assessed $1,000. 

Q. Did you say he would not carry a certain ward in 
his district, unless he made a payment to you ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you approach him and demand the payment from 
him to you of any sum ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Was the payment about which you have told us a pay¬ 
ment to you, or the committee ? A. The payment to the 
committee. 

Q. There was no conversation at any time about the pay¬ 
ment to you ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with Baggott about it 
at any time ? A. No, sir. 

Q. There was nothing said to you by Baggott at any 


180 


time ? A. No, sir ; I have talked with Frost and Baggott; 
I met them one day. The first time Baggott got angry with 
me I stopped him on Olive and Fourth. 

Q. We do not care about this, unless it pertains to this 
matter ? A. It does. They were going up Fourth street in 
a buggy. I stopped them and said to Mr. Frost he ought 
not to take Baggott up in the district; that his appearance 
up there with him would cost him a great many votes, and 
he said he would only take him to a certain place and then 
drop him. I don’t think he did though. That was my in¬ 
formation afterwards. 

Q. Do you remember filing a petition with the Secretary of 
the Treasury, the Honorable Lot M. Morrill, asking for a 
compromise of the Government’s claim against you on ac¬ 
count of the Busby bond ? A. If you mean by signing a 
petition to be presented to Mr. Morrill by my attorney, yes. 

Q. That is what I mean. Did you do that ? A. I said 
yes. 

Q. Who was your attorney ? A. M. A. Bryson. 

Q. Did he take the paper to Washington? A. He did. 

Q. Did you make an affidavit to the petition ? A. I ex¬ 
pect I did. 

Q. Would you recognize a copy of the petition by reading 
it ? A. No, sir ; I would not now. I think it was in 1876. 

Q. Did you file other papers by other parties asking that 
a favorable compromise be made with you ? A. That is the 
only paper I know of. 

Q. That was filed in your behalf ? A. That I know of. 

Q. That was filed in your behalf by others, is that what 
you mean? A. Yes, sir ; if they were filed I do not know. 

Q. The claim against you was compromised ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. For $500 ? A. That is the whole amount to the Gov¬ 
ernment, I expect. 

Q. How much of that did you pay ? A. I paid one-third 
of it and all the costs. 

Q. The other sureties I suppose paid the other two-thirds 
of the $500 ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. Will you be kind enough to look at the copy of the 
affidavit and petition as set out in the answer, and say 
whether you recognize it ? A. I have seen that I suppose. 
I have a copy of your answer. I do not know whether that 
is a copy of it or not. I never kept a copy. 

Q. Do you recognize any part of it ? A. I do not. 


181 


Q. Do you say that any part of it was not in the affidavit 
which you filed ? 

[Plaintiff’s counsel objects to the question; objection 
sustained. 

Q. Do you know Silas Bent ? A. I do. 

Q. Did you ever go to him and ask him to run for Mayor ? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion as immaterial; objection overruled.] 

A. I think I did. 

Q. Did you suggest it would be necessary to pay $1,500 
to get the nomination ? A. I did not. 

Q. Did you make a suggestion of money to him ? A. No, 
sir. 

Q. Of any kind ? A. Of no kind. 

Q. When was the conversation, what year ? A. I think 
it was immediately after the death of Mr. Barrett. 

Q. In what year was that, Mr. Lancaster ? A. 1875. 

Q. Where was the conversation? A. That I could not 
tell, where I met Mr. Bent. There were several Democrats 
suggested at that time by a good many parties as a suitable 
candidate for Mayor, and Mr. Bent was one of them, Mr. 
William J. Lewis was another one, and if I remember right, 
Mr. Thomas E. Tutt was another. 

Q. That is not the question exactly? A. Mr. Julius 
Walsh was another one. 

Q. I wuxald rather you would confine yourself to the ques¬ 
tion. [ To the stenographer.] What was the question ; I 
forgot what it was, he has been so discursive. 

[The stenographer reads the question.] 

Q. I understand you to say you met him on the street, 
is that correct ? A. I did not say that. 

Q. Were was the conversation then ? A. I could not say. 

Q. Was it at his house ? A. I don’t know;" I don’t think 
it was. 

Q. You don’t remember where it was ? A. I do not. 

Q. It was not at your office, was it ? A. My recollection 
is it was in consultation with Joseph O’Neill. 

Q. Joseph O’Neill was present ? A. I incline to think so. 
I am not sure about that. 

Q. Is he living now ? A. Joseph O’Neill, yes, sir. 

Q. Please state the conversation with Mr. Bent according 
to your version and recollection of it ? A. I don’t recollect 
the conversation, I could not attempt to repeat it. As you 


182 


call my attention to it, I remember now that he was called 
on, and was spoken of, he was called on to know if he would 
make the race in opposition to Mr. Overstoltz. 

Q. Are you giving what was said between him and you ? 
If so, all right, if not, I don’t ask you for it ? A. I could 
not do it to save my life ? 

Q. Is there anything further you have to give ? A. I know 
he declined to make the race. » 

Q. What did he say in declining ? A. That he could not 
afford to give it the time, or he was engaged in such a way 
that he could not make the race ; he said he could not make 
the race. 

Q. Did he state he would not pay any money for it ? A. 
There was no money required. 

Q. You were treasurer of the Big Muddy Iron Company, 
were you, Mr. Lancaster ? A. I was. 

Q. Were you one of its directors ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And treasurer ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember buying for the company of the Cen¬ 
tral Savings Bank a claim against the Walls Company, then 
in bankruptcy ? A. I do not. 

Q. Do you remember buying a claim against the Walls’ 
Company in 1872 ? A. No, sir ; I did not buy it at all, you 
are wrong on that question. 

Q. Please state the facts, you know to what I am direct¬ 
ing your attention ? A. I did not buy it at all. 

Q. You did not buy such a claim ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Did yoiracquire such a claim? A. O’Reilly and I ac¬ 
quired that claim, it was assigned to us by the company for 
moneys loaned. 

Q. When ? A. It was along in 1872 during the troubles 
of the Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. What was the claim? A note, was it ? A. It was the 
balance of a note of $10,000. 

Q. And the balance of how much ? A. That I could not 
tell exactly what it was at the time, it was transferred and 
assigned. 

Q. $3,000 or $4,000, somewhere along there? A. Iam 
trying to think whether it was $2,500 or $3,500, it was either 
one of those sums I think. 

Q. Did it bear interest? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion ; objection overruled. 

A. I expect it did. 


183 


Q. Don’t you know? A. I do not know, I think it bore 
interest after maturity. 

Q. Was it six or ten per cent ? A. That I conld not say, 
what the amount was now. 

Q. Do yon mean to say yon do not now remember ? A. I 
don’t remember the amount, that is what I mean to say. 

Q. Were there statutory damages on the note ? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion, as the papers are the best evidence ; the commissioner / 
rules that the witness may answer the question if he knows. 

A. When it was assigned ? 

Q. Yes? A. Not that I know of. 

Q. At any time? A. No, not by the bank, the bank 
never charged it. 

Q. Which bank? A. The Citizens’ Bank, where the note 
was taken up from. 

Q. Who did charge it ? A. I finally had it allowed in 
Springfield. 

Q. In whose favor ? A. In mine. 

Q. Did you have any interest allowed ? A. The interest 
was allowed, whatever' interest was entitled to be allowed 
was allowed, I assume; I have forgotten especially the 
amounts. 

Q. Did you account to the Big Muddy Iron Company for 
,the damages ? A. No, sir. ✓ 

Q. Did you account for the difference between six and ten 
percent, interest? A. I accounted for everything except 
the $400, that did not belong to the Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany, that was an arrangement made between the bank, the 
president of the Big Muddy Iron Company and myself. I 
will give you the whole transaction, so that you will under¬ 
stand how to ask the next question. The Big Muddy Iron 
Company required money. There was a note made by the 
company endorsed by Dr. Thomas O’ Reilly and myself. We 
presented that note to the Central Bank and they refused 
to give us a discount, on the ground that there was a dead 
note lying there, that we were also endorsers on. I am try¬ 
ing to think whether the note had been assigned—yes, the 
claim had been assigned prior to this time. 

Q. Assigned to whom? A. Assigned to O’Reilly and 
myself. 

Q. You were going to give me the whole transaction ; 
please proceed A. I am, I was just trying to think about 
that. The cashier stated finally that if we would take up 


184 


that they would give us a discount, provided we would take 
up the dead note. 

Q. Give who the discount ? A. Give the Big Muddy 
Iron Comxmny with our endorsements, with the endorsers 
that were bn the note ; in other words they wanted the dead 
note, as they called it, taken up and turned it over for what 
the amount was ; I don’t know whether $2,500 or $3,500, 
and did not charge the damages, $400, it was a $10,000 note, 
on the understanding with O’Reilly if I could collect it, 
which was doubtful at the time. The bank said they were 
entitled to it, but would throw it off in consideration of the 
other payment being made by us then, O’Reilly and myself, 
which was done. I afterwards took the note to a bankrupt 
court and Judge Treat allowed it. 

Q. Against the Walls Company? A. Against the Walls 
Company. 

Q. This was a note of the Walls Company and not of the 
Big Muddy Iron Company ? • A. That was a note of the 
Walls Comx)any that was assigned—that became the x)iop- 
erty of the Big Muddy, and then was assigned by the Big- 
Muddy to O’Reilly and myself for moneys advanced in ad¬ 
vance of the payment by the bankrupt court. I want to answer 
that fully; the reason why I was allowed this amount was 
because I had made several trips to Springfield, Illinois, and 
charged nothing to the company of which O’Reilly was 
president ; I belonged to that conrpany originally and I 
charged them nothing for my services, not as treasurer, and 
in consideration of this labor the president said “ if you col¬ 
lect that you can have it for your trouble of collecting it, 
your exxjenses, etc.” 

Q. The President? A. Yes, sir; that was done, sir. 

Q. He said that as President of the Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany? A. Yes, sir ; and as connected with me as the as¬ 
signee of the claim. 

Q. Now, when you accounted for the x>rincipal of the note, 

I believe, according to your version of the transaction, you 
were under obligations to, and did account for, the prin- 
cipal of the note and six per cent, interest to the Big Muddy 
Iron Company; is that correct? A. No; the fact is, lac- 
counted to ourselves, because the Big Muddy Iron Company, 
at the time of the collection of this money, was out of ex¬ 
istence. 

Q. At the time of the assignment was it in existence ? 
A. It assigned, yes, to us, and we had to wait for, I 
think, a year or two before we got the money. 


185 * 


Q. So you never made any accounting to the Big Muddy 
Iron Company at all ? A. Oh, yes ; the charges were made 
on the books to close up the old concern. 

Q. On the books of the old company ? A. Yes. 

Q. Well, now there, I understand you to say you did not 
account for the difference between six and ten per cent., nor 
for the damages, is that so ? A. I did not say the differ¬ 
ence between six and ten per cent., I said I accounted for 
everything except the damages, $400, and whatever interest 
was allowed, I don’t remember whether there was any or 
not, but whatever there was I did not account for that be¬ 
cause it did not belong to the Big Muddy Iron Company, it 
belonged to me. 

Q. You did not account for any interest at all, or for the 
excess above six per cent. ? A. I am telling you that I ac¬ 
counted for everything except the $400, and whatever in¬ 
terest was allowed on the $400, if any ; now I cannot remem¬ 
ber whether any was allowed or not. 

Q. I am not asking you about the interest on the $400, 
but I am asking you about the interest on the $3,500 ; 
whether you accounted for any interest on that ? A. Yes, 
sir; I accounted for all the interest allowed by the Court at 
Springfield, every dollar. 

Q. Was it at that time, and in that transaction, you used 
the words: “ I went to Springfield and got the interest 
raised on the Central Bank claim from six to ten per cent., 
and also $400 damages ; the understanding was by taking 
up that note, between the bank officers and myself, they 
would throw off the damages and give it to me for my trou¬ 
ble in collecting it, and I kept it, of course?” A. I don’t 
think I ever made any such a statement as that. 

Q. You don’t think that is correct ? A. No, sir; I don’t 
think it is. 

Q. It is totally incorrect, or only incorrect in part? A. 
It is incorrect as far as that statement is concerned, it is 
not correct, it is not true. 

Q. The whole statement ? A. No; the whole statement is 
not. 

Q. What part is correct ? A. What is correct is, I re¬ 
ceived $400 under the arrangement, that is correct. 

Q. But you did not have the interest raised from six to 
ten per cent. ? A. No; I had the interest reduced. 

Q. When you were collecting it you had the interest re¬ 
duced ? A. On another claim, which increased the claims 
of the associates and stockholders. 


186 

Q, What claim was that ? A. That was a claim of Shickle, 
Harrison & Company. 

Q. For how much ? A. That I could not tell. 

Q. Against whom ? A. That was against the Walls Com¬ 
pany. 

Q. How did the reducing of interest on that increase the 
interest due the stockholders of the Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany ? A. Why, because it gave a larger dividend than 
otherwise—than we would have gotten otherwise. 

Q. You mean if the Shickle-Harrison Company’s claim 
had gotten the interest they demanded there would be less 
for the Big Muddy Iron Company ? A. Yes, sir; not for 
the Big Muddy Iron Company, nor the associates that own 
these claims. 

Q. Assignees of the Big Muddy Iron Company ? A. BTo, 
sir; not assignees. 

Q. What associates ? A. The stockholders. 

Q. You mean the men that bought the assets ? A. I did 
not mean that at all. 

Q. Please explain. A. I have already stated there were 
no trustees. 

Q. Who owned the assets that had belonged to the Big 
Muddy Iron Company ? A. That had belonged to the Big 
Muddy Iron Company ? 

Q. Yes. A. They did not belong to the Big Muddy Iron 
Company. 

Q. They had some assets, didn’t they, at one time ? A. 
It had $1,860 to start on. 

Q. That was capital, but it had works and assets ? A. It 
had assets, I won’t say that ; it had not until it paid its 
debts ; it had borrowed money. 

Q. Who owned the property it had owned, I am not talk¬ 
ing about solvency, but property standing in its name? A. 
I was the purchaser of the property originally at $139,000. 

Q. I am not asking for figures, I am just asking for the 
succession in title ? A. I am giving it if you will let me. 

Q. I don’t care dbout so much detail ; you say you ac¬ 
counted for the principal of this note to the Big Muddy Iron 
Company, don’t you? A. I accounted in this way, it 
was already assigned by the Big Muddy Iron Company for 
moneys advanced to the company by O’ Reilly and myself. 

Q. When was that done ? A. That was done in 1872. 

Q. In writing ? A. Yes, sir, in writing. 

Q. Is the assignment in existence ? A: It is if the books 
can be found. 


187 


Q. The hooks of the old company ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wouldn’t you have the assignment if it was assigned 
to you ? A. No. 

Q. Or O’Reilly have it? A. No. 

Q. What did you do with it after you received it ? A. 
Do with what ? 

Q. The assignment ? A. The assignment was—let me see, 

I cannot remember the particular circumstances now about 
that; my recollection is that it was necessary for the com¬ 
pany to send a record of the assignment to the -Court for 
moneys that could be collected by O’Reilly and myself. 

Q. Were they not collected by you as treasurer for the 
Big Muddy Iron Company ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Was not the assignment an authority to collect simply ? 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Investing you with the beneficial title in the claim ? 
A. It did in one sense of the word. 

Q. In what sense of the word ? A. In the sense that the 
eompany had already got the money for those claims before 
O’Reilly and I collected them. 

Q. How did they get it ? A. By moneys advanced by 
O’Reilly and myself, as I stated. 

Q. In other words, they simply owed you money ? A. 
Yes, sir; and we got this in consideration of moneys we ad¬ 
vanced. 

Q. In payment ? A. Yes, sir, it would be when the time 
come. 

Q. You got it as collateral, as security ? A. No, sir; it 
was absolutely assigned. 

Q. At what figure ? A. At what it was worth at its face 
at that time. 

Q. No figure fixed ? A. The amount was fixed, I pre¬ 
sume, but whatever it was I cannot state. 

Q. You were to take it in payment for whatever it repre¬ 
sented at the time ? A. No; then, it was stated at so much 
then, that is my recollection. 

Q. A certain figure ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was that in writing? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, I understand this claim against the Walls Com¬ 
pany was originally owned by the Central Bank, is that so ? 
A. It was. 

Q. How did the Big Muddy Iron Company come to ac¬ 
quire it? A. By taking it up. 

Q. By the endorsers ? A. No. 

Q. Well, explain. Did they buy it outright in the 


188 


market ? A. The Big Muddy Iron Company had nothing to 
do with that claim at all. 

Q. To whom did it pass from the Central Bank, after they 
owned it who owned it next ? A. It passed to O’Reilly and 
myself, that is my recollection. 

Q. When did the Big Muddy Iron Company take it up? 
A. At the time I refer to. 

Q. When they took it up they owned it ? A. It was taken 
up, as I say, by that arrangement, by getting a discount on 
$10,000, that is the difference, the difference between the 
amount and the $10,000 went to the Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany, that is, the amount of this claim went to the benefit 
of the Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. In other words, the Big Muddy Iron Company dis¬ 
counted the $10,000 note of the Central Bank, is that so— 
in the Central Bank I mean ? A. The Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany made a note that O’Rielly and I endorsed. 

Q. Payable to whom ? A. That was discounted—I sup¬ 
pose it was payable to the order of self, probably, I cannot 
say now, it might have been payable to the order of—I 
don’t know how the banks required it at that time. 

Q. It was discounted for the benefit of the company ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. The Big Muddy Iron Company? A. Yes, sir; the 
proceeds went to the company, less the amount of this claim. 

Q. That is the way the company became the owner of the 
claim ? A. No, the company, as I understand it, did not 
become the owner, it did not become the owner of the claim, 
it was assigned to O’Reilly and myself. 

Q. Didn’t you say it was assigned to you by the Big Mud¬ 
dy Iron Company in payment of money you advanced to the 
company ? A. All other claims were, for instance the claims 
of the stockholders were assigned. 

Q. That is no matter, I am asking you whether this was 
assigned or not ? A. I can't remember this ; this could not 
have been assigned, of course not. 

Q. Not assigned to you and O’Reilly ? A. No, no, to the 
Big Muddy Iron Company, the Big Muddy Iron Company 
did not own it; it could not be assigned to the Big Muddy 
Iron Company. 

Q. Didn’t you say the Big Muddy Iron Company assigned 
it to you and O’Reilly in payment of advances made by you 
and O’Reilly, didn’t you say that ten minutes ago ? A. I 
meant all the claims against the Walls Mining and Manu- 


189 


\ 


facturing Company owned individually by stockholders 
were assigned to O'Reilly and myself for moneys advanced. 

Q. Is this one of those ? A. No, sir ; it is not one of 
those. I tell you how this came in the possession of O’ Reilly 
and myself was on that transaction, that there was a note 
made for a discount, and this was taken out ; now how it 
became assigned, whether it was assigned before or after, 
that was what I was studying about awhile ago, I can’t re¬ 
member. 

Q. That just what we want to know? A. That I couldn’t 
tell you, it could not be assigned before. 

Q. Why not ? A. You could not assign something you 
did not own. 

Q. Do you mean to say it was assigned afterwards ? A. 
It must have been if it ever belonged to the Big Muddy Iron 
Company. 

Q. Didn’t you just now say it never did belonged to them ? 
A. The $400 never did. 

Q. I am talking about the principal note. A. I know 
what I said, I said a while ago the $400 never did belong to 
them because that was never paid to the bank, one dollar, 
the bank did not claim it. 

Q. What was the business of the Walls Company ? A. The 
Walls Company was the owner, the original owner of the 
works at Grand Tower, Illinois, the furnace. 

Q. Which afterwards became the Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany? A. [Continuing.] Which was sold under a bank¬ 
rupt sale and purchased by myself for $139,000, one.third 
cash, and the balance I have forgotten. 

Q. And became the property of the Big Muddy Iron Com¬ 
pany ? A. (Continuing.) Which I immediately turned over 
to the Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. You made it a corporation? A. I made it a corpora¬ 
tion. 

Q. Do you remember making a statement in reference to 
the Big Muddy Iron Company accounting for the collection 
of this money in this Walls claim note, which figured as 
Exhibit Q in the suit of Bulkley against yourself and others % 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion as calling for the contents of a writing.] 

A. I could not say. 

Q. You don’t know whether you did make such a state¬ 
ment or not ? A. I could not tell whether I made such a 
statement or not, in answer to your question. 



190 




Q. Did you make a statement in writing ? I think you 
have referred to a statement you made in writing, or an 
entry on the books of the old corporation touching this 
transaction, have you not ? A. I have not that I remember. 

Q. You have not in your testimony to-day? A. Not that 
I remember. 

Q. Who executed the assignment by the Big Muddy Iron 
Company to you of this claim to you and O’Reilly, if there 
was any executed ? A. It must have been the President and 
Secretary. 

Q. Who was the President ? A. Dr. O’Reilly. 

Q. Who was the Secretary? A. The Secretary was P. C. 
Bulkley. 

Q. Can you fix the date of that assignment ? 'A. No, sir; 
I could not. 

Q. You cannot say whether it was before or after your 
collection of that claim ? A. It was before, because Bulkley 
was not Secretary when the claim was collected, and the 
amount was paid several months prior ; I don’t know how 
long it was after; Bulkley was discharged from the Company 
long before. 


[Not being able to complete the taking of said depositions 
by reason of want of time, I adjourned the further taking of 
same until to-morrow, April 20th, 1887, at 2 o’clock P. M.] 


[Not being able to complete the taking of said deposition by 
reason of non-attendance of witnesses, I adjourned further 
taking of same until to-morrow April 21st, 1887, at 2 o’clock 
P. M.] 


Pursuant to adjournment, as above stated, on the 21st day 
of April, 1887, I continued the taking of said deposition, as 
follows : 

Richard D. Lancaster, in continuation of his deposition, 
on his oath further says : 

% 

Further direct examination by Jacob Klein , Esq. 

Q. Mr. Lancaster, when we stopped in the last session, we 
were speaking of this matter of the Big Muddy Iron Com- 





191 


pany. I understand from you and from your testimony that 
there were two companies ; that one was the Walls Com¬ 
pany and the other was the Big Muddy Iron Company, is 
that correct ? Yes, there was the Walls Company and the 
Big Muddy Iron Company. 

Q. Which was the first of those two companies ? A. The 
Walls Company. 

Q. Were you a stockholder in that? A. I was. 

Q. Were the stockholders in that company substantially 
the same as those who afterwards became stockholders in the 
Big Muddy Iron Company ? A. No, not all of them. 

Q. But many of them same stockholders were in both 
companies, were they not? A. Yes, sir. I stated in con¬ 
nection with that that the Walls Company was sold under 
a bankruptcy sale, by order of the court in Springfield—the 
United States Court, or United States District Court, I don’t 
know which. 

Q. Springfield, Illinois ? A. Yes, sir ; and that I bought 
it in my name, or rather I wasn’t at the Court-house when 
it was sold, but it was bid in by P. C. Bulkley as one of the 
associates, and bought in my name, and at that time we or¬ 
ganized a corporation for the purpose of buying it, and the 
corporation capital, the capital of that corporation—I will 
put it in that way—amounted to $1,860. The purchase was 
for $139,100 ; I remember that very distinctly. 

Q. Now, the Walls Company, then, went into bankruptcy, 
did it ? A. It had gone into bankruptcy at the time. I am 
talking- 

Q. Prior to this time it had been in bankruptcy ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. And all of its assets were sold by the assignee in 
bankruptcy ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, at this sale that you speak of, did that include 
all of the assets of the company ? A. Yes, sir ; it included 
tfe company’s property. 

Q. Ail ? A. It included its works and whatever coal and 
ore was on hand at that time, if any. 

Q. Did it include any book accounts and notes and bills 
receivable? A. No, sir. 

Q. Those were not included in the sale ? A. No, sir. 

Q. How was the $139,100 paid—in what manner? A. It 
was advanced by the associates ; each one paid a pro rata 
share, according to the number of shares held by them in 
the corporation formed to purchase ; that is my recollection, 
and I think that is the way it was. 




192 


Q. Did that proportion have anything to do with the pro¬ 
portion of other previous holdings in the Walls company ? 
A. Oh, yes; their holdings, or rather the claims of those 
parties in the Walls company, were assigned to me as the 
purchaser to be turned over to the assignee of the* Wall’s 
company in part paid for the property—for the purchase. 

Q. Now, did the Wall’s company pay all of its debts in 
bankruptcy ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In full ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. Had they paid all the debts outside of this one note 
that you got from the Central Savings Bank previous to that 
time, or were the debts paid after that time ? A. The debts 
were paid after the sale. 

Q. This sale was long before the time when you got that 
note, was it not ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then the debts had been paid before that time, had 
they ? A. Before what time ? 

Q. Before the time that you got that note of the Central 
Savings Bank? A. No, sir. 

Q. Well, how was that? A. If it was, the note held by 
the Central Savings Bank would have been paid, and I could 
not have got it. 

Q. How is that ? A. It w T as one of the things that had 
been paid up by the assignee. 

Q. Then, on that note, I understood you were endorser ? 
A. Yes, sir; O’ Reilly and myself were endorsers; that is my 
recollection. 

Q. And the note itself was made out by which company ? 
A. It was made out by the Wall’s company. 

Q. Who had procured the discount, and for whom was it 
discounted ? A. It was discounted for the Walls Company. 

Q. And you had procured that discount, had you ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. How long after the organization of the Bid Muddy 
Iron Company was it that the Big Muddy Iron Company 
transferred that claim to you and Dr. O’Reilly? A. I 
couldn’t tell you when it was transferred to myself and 
O’Reilly, sometime in 1872. 

Q. Sometime in 1872 ? A. Of course it was before it was 
paid finally by the assignee. 

Q. But you don’t remember exactly the time? A. I couldn’t 
tell you the dates. 

Q. Then before the Big Muddy Iron Company transferred 
that claim to you it had become the owner of that claim, 
had it ? A. Yes. 


193 


Q. And it was the owner of the claim at the time of this 
transfer to you ? A. Yes, it was the owner of the claim; it 
is my recollection that it was the owner of the claim when 
it was transferred. 

Q. How did it become N the owner of the claim ? A. By 
taking it up. 

Q. By taking it up ? A. By taking it up—paying the 
bank the amount due at the time. 

Q. Do you mean by “ taking it up” in the same manner 
that you have heretofore described, viz: deducting the 
amount thereof from the ten thousand dollar note which 
you then gave in the name of the Big Muddy Iron Company 
to be discounted by the bank ? A. That is exactly how it 
was done. 

Q. That is the way it was taken up, and after that dis¬ 
counted then in favor of the Big Muddy Iron Company, the 
Big Muddy Iron Company made the transfer to you ? A. 
It was done, but at what time I couldn’t tell you. 

Q. Well, was it before or after ? A. After it became the 
owner ? 

Q. I mean was it before or after the discount that the ar¬ 
rangement was made that it should be transferred to you ? 
A. The bank had no arrangement with it at all to transfer 
that to me and O’Reilly. 

Q. But was there any arrangement made between your¬ 
self and the Big Muddy Iron Company in relation to it ? A. 
It was at the time it was transferred—that is at the time I 
collected it. 

Q. Then it was not transferred until the time you collected 
it? A. Oh, yes ; it was transferred before. 

Q. Before? A. Yes, sir; everything was transferred. 
The fact is she had no capital ; whatever assets she had 
were transferee! either to the banks or to somebody for 
moneys advanced, and because it was going on and doing a 
business of ten thousand dollars a month expense without 
any capital except borrowed capital from the banks, and 
from myself and O’Reilly. 

Q. I am not talking about any advances or transfer to 
other persons, or in regard to any other matters except this 
one claim of six thousand dollars, I believe it is. A. I 
want you to understand how that was done, and it was done 
just in that way. 

Q. Which way was it done? A. It was done for money 
advanced by the company. 

Q. When was the transfer ma^e, before or after the money 


194 


had been advanced? A. I think it was done at the time 
the money was advanced, because that is the way it had 
been done right along through. The company had its board 
of directors, and when money was necessary the board met 
and the secretary notified the board that it was necessary 
to have so much money ; also notified the board what assets 
it had to raise money on, and a resolution would be passed 
as a general thing, noted and kept in a record book of all 
those transactions, and this was one of them, and I can’t 
tell the date ; I never kept the date. 

Q. Was there any record made of this transaction. A. 
Oh, yes ; there was a record book and all of those things 
were kept in that record book. 

Q. Was there any resolution to assign this claim to you 
by the Board of Directors ? A. There was — that is my re¬ 
collection, and it was assigned to O’Reilly and myself, and 
not only this clain but all the other claims. 

Q. When it was assigned to you and O’Reilly;'was it as¬ 
signed to you absolutely or as collateral to secure you for 
money you had advanced? A. Well, I won’t be positive 
about that as to whether it was assigned to me as collateral 
or absolutely. 

Q. Were you, after the assignment, still obliged to render 
any account in any manner for the amount that you were 
collecting thereon ? A. Yes, sir; I did. * 

Q. You did render an account to whom ? A. I rendered 
an account to the President of the Company. 

Q. After it was dissolved ? A. Oh, long before. 

Q. Who was the President to whom you rendered this 
account? A. O’Reilly. 

Q. Did you render any account to anybody else ? A. No, 
sir ; there was not anybody else then. 

Q. Did you ever render any account in regard to it ? A. 
No'—yes, I rendered an account in court for one item. 

Q. The other items you had rendered an account for to 
the president, had you? A. Yes, sij ; there was one item 
of $583.38 that there was a controversy about, which has 
been brought into this discussion, and I wish to explain in 
regard to it ; you have asked me about it before. 

Q. We will get to that presently ; of course you are at 
liberty to make any explanation to any question asked if 
you see fit. A. Well, in regard to this matter here about 
rendering this account, I will say that I have rendered a 
full account of all the moneys collected by me to the presi¬ 
dent of the company, but it was sometime after the com- 


195 


pany had sold to the new company ; the company was out 
of existence ; there was no secretary to it at this time ; at 
the same time, though, the board of directors had not dis¬ 
solved until the wind up, which was about a year or so after 
the sale. The amounts of these assignments and collaterals 
were not collected from the Springfield Court until the 
latter part of 1873 ; some collections were made in 1874 for 
that company. 

Q. That is, by yourself ? A. Yes, sir, by myself as 
treasurer, and accounted for. . 

Q. To whom ? A. To the president—accounted for in 
this way ; that money was collected, and every dollar that 
was collected at this time was put up either as collateral or 
was assigned for a certain purpose or a certain note, and 
when this money was collected this note was paid of the Big 
Muddy Iron Company that we were responsible for, and 
that ended it, and then there was a complete settlement made 
on the books by a man employed for that purpose, to write 
them up. 

Q. Who was that man employed by ? A. He was the 
former book-keeper. 

Q. Who was he employed by ? A. O’Reilly and myself. 

Q. Hid the other stock-holders of the old company have 
anything to do with that matter ? A. They did; they knew 
all about it. 

Q. They knew all about it ? A. Yes, sir; the Board knew 
all about it. 

Q. Hid the Board maintain its organization until the last 
item had been collected ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. And you reported to the Board, did you, in regard to 
the matter ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you sure of that? A. I am; I reported to the 
President, which amounts to the same thing. 

Q. Well, you and O’Reilly had mutual interests in the 
matter, did you not? A. We were big stockholders. 

Q. You were large stockholders, and you had made large 
advances together, had you not? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And many of those accounts and notes had been as¬ 
signed to you to be held as collateral; is not that so? A. 
Well, now let me see ; I have forgotten whether that is so in 
regard to the first company or not; of course we were in the 
second company the same way, and carried it on nearly on 
the same principle, although we transferred our moneys ad¬ 
vanced and became stock-holders; that is how the old sold 
to the new, and by that sale the new company paid its debts, 


196 


and O’Reilly and I had to pay them as endorsers, because 
we had to carry the load. 

Q. Now, to get back to the proposition that we left a 
moment ago, was this claim that the Central Savings’ Bank 
held rgainst the Walls Company assigned to you and Dr. 
O’Reilly to be held as collateral or not? A. I have stated 
that I don’t know positively whether it was assigned as col¬ 
lateral or absolutely turned over to us. 

Q. What is your best impression about that ? A. I wont 
say; I can’t say. 

Q. You cannot remember ? A. I can’t remember, for that 
was in 1872. 

Q. Well, these matters have been discussed a'number of 
times since then, have they not, both in court, in the matter 
of Bulkley against Big Muddy Iron Company, and at other 
places ? A. Yes, they had been discussed by Mr. Bulkley 
and other parties.' 

Q. And in court? A. Mr. Bulkley brought his suit 
against all of the stockholders,- and he was one of the parties 
that did not go into the purchase. 

Q. And did not go into the organization of the new con¬ 
cern ? A. No, sir; he was discharged because he was found 
incompetent, and he got us into a good deal of trouble; he 
got us into a good deal of trouble with Shickle, Harrison & 
Co., and created a large amount of expense and costs in the 
court up there that we had to pay. 

Q. Never mind about him, we want to get back to this 
particular claim held by the Central Savings’ Bank. You 
say that in point of fact you did render an account in regard 
to amounts that you collected there with the exception of 
one item ? A. I did. 

Q. And with respect to that one item you rendered an 
account in court ? A. No, sir ; I did not render an account 
in court until after suit was brought, and I can tell you why 
that suit was brought. 

Q. \ou need not say why the suit was brought; 1 don’t 
think it is necessary ? A. I will have to tell you about that 
item because you cannot tell anything about it unless I tell 
you what that item was. 

Q. I can get at the item without knowing why the suit 
was brought? A. Very well. 

Q. That one item was an item of damages on the note and 
the difference between six and ten per cent interest, was it 
not ? A. No, sir ; that was not the item at all. 


197 


Q. What was the item ? A. The item was an amount of 
$583.38. 

What was it composed of 1 A. It was an amoumt al¬ 
lowed as costs that we had paid, that the associates had al¬ 
lowed us, and was refunded in the suit of the Big Muddy 
Iron Company against Sliickle, Harrison & Co. This money 
that I am now talking of never belonged to the Wall Com¬ 
pany or either of the Big Muddy Iron Companies ; that be¬ 
longed to the stockholders who were known as “associates” 
for the purpose of defending the claims of Sliickle, Horrison 
& Co., against the Walls Company as builders of the fur¬ 
naces, machinery, etc., Mr. Bulkley claimed that the com¬ 
pany was charged a large sum, more than the property was 
worth by the contractors, and that is why the suit was 
brought, and we put up money to defend that suit, and Mr. 
Buckley managed it and made a bull of it—that is about 
the condition of it. 

Q. What was the item composed of ? A. The item that I 
am referring to was composed of $583 in money, which I 
received to be distributed back to the associates. Now, the 
trouble about some of the associates at that time, and up to 
the present, is that they never paid their assessments- 

Q. You can see that that part of the matter is all imma¬ 
terial to the inquiry made of you. A. I know, but I am 
telling you what the money is ; the charge has been made 
here by Glover against me that I never accounted for that 
money, and it was never entered on the books of the com¬ 
pany. I think in a letter to Mr. Edmunds, of the Senate, 
he made that charge. Now, I am telling you that that 
money never belonged to the company, or either of the com¬ 
panies ; it belonged to the associates—the stockholders of 
the Walls Company and the Big Muddy Iron Company, and, 
as I say, that is not all ; we put up a large sqm of money- 

Q. Never mind about the sums of money you put up ; let 
us keep ourselves to this matter. You have not yet said 
what this sum of money, $583.38, was actually composed 
of—how that sum accrued. A. I have told you that, but 
you don’t seem to understand it. 

Q. I understand it thoroughly, but I didn’t get it from 
your statement, or don’t get the facts from you in regard to 
it so that I can understand it. Was this $583.38 interest \ 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Was it costs \ A. It was costs. 

Q. Costs on what ? A. Costs in this suit, as I have stated. 






198 


Q. Costs in what suit ? A. As I have stated, in the suit 
of the associates against Shickle, Harrison & Company. 

Q. Hid you not also collect after you had received the as¬ 
signment of that claim held by the Central Savings Bank 
against the Walls Company, the 4 per cent, damages on 
that note? A. Certainly; I collected the 4 per cent, dam¬ 
ages of the $10,000 note, that— 

Q. Is that a part of the $583 ? A. No, sir. 

Q. That is not ? A. No, sir. 

Q. But you did collect four per cent, damages on that 
$10,000 note ? A. I did. 

Q. And did you collect ten per cent, interest on that sum 
on the balance that was due on it ? A. I have forgotten 
whether there was any interest allowed or not; I think there 
was some interest allowed on it. 

Q. Now, in making an account to the Big Muddy Iron 
Company or to the President of the company, did you account 
for and turn over those damages and that interest—all of it ? 
A. I did in this way; in making my report to the President 
of the Big Muddy Iron Company—no; the fact is, before I 
made my report it was understood that if I could collect that 
amount which was never paid to the bank, which never be¬ 
longed to the Big Muddy Iron Company—she had no inter¬ 
est in it because she never paid anything for it, and as I had 
received no salary for my services as treasurer of that com¬ 
pany and financiering its business—I say it was understood 
that I would be paid : O’Reilly, ’the President of the com¬ 
pany said to me: “ In consideration of your several trips to 
Springfield, Illinois, if you can collect that damage—$400, 
on the Walls Company note from the bankrupt court, why, 
you keep it to pay your expenses, and in consideration of 
your service,” and when I made my report, of course I 
didn’t turn it over because it was stated as well as before 
that, as O’Reilly says, and the fact was at the time, that 
the company never owned any part of that $400; she never 
paid a dollar for it, because it was never paid to the bank; 
the bank said: “If you will take up this note, we will dis¬ 
count your $10,000 note, and not ask you to pay the dama¬ 
ges,” and the cashier said, knowing that I had an interest 
in the matter, and would have to go to Springfield, he sug¬ 
gested to me: “If you can collect, it will help to pay you 
for your services. 

Q. Well, the damages were on that note ? A. The note 
was protested, of course. 

Q. And the damages were in consequence of the protest 


*199 


fees ? A. Yes, sir ; that is what it was, but the bank could 
have collected it if she chose, but she didn’t do it. 

Q. And the interest was the same way, was it not ? A. 
Certainly. 

Q. Now then, the note was taken up out of the funds of 
the Big Muddy Iron Company, raised by this discount 
which you procured there, was it not ? A. The face of the 
note less the damages ; the damages were never taken up. 

Q. In other words the bank never charged the damages ? 
A. Never. 

Q. But they didn’t release the damages to the Walls 
Company either ? A. Yo, sir. 

Q. They didn’t release the damages to the Walls Com¬ 
pany ? A. No, sir ; there was no release about that, of 
course. 

Q. Was there any entry made in the books showing that 
you collected this sum of 4 per cent damages and this in¬ 
terest, and that you charged it against the company for 
your services? A. No, sir; that was not done, as I tell 
you. 

Q. In the books ? A. It was understood at the time that 
no entries should be made because there would have to be 
two entries at the time. 

Q. What w r as the objection to making an entry ? A.. Be¬ 

cause there would have to be two entries made in place of 
one. 

Q. What two entries ? A. Why, the collection as well 
as the advance payment by me, and there was no necessity 
of it as if didn’t belong to the company as it was consid¬ 
ered at the time. * 

Q. By whom w T as it considered at the time that it didn’t 
belong to the company ? A. By the president. 

Q. And by yourself ? A. Yes, sir ; that was perfectly 
understood. 

Q. No other member of the company knew anything about 
it, did they? A. That I couldn’t say ; I assume that they 
did, though ? 

Q. Whom did you ever tell about it ? A. Oh, they all 
knew^ it; all the member of the board knew it, as I under¬ 
stood it; there was no secret about it at all. 

Q. Did you report it to the members of the board ? A. 
I reported the whole transaction, as I say, to the president, 
and I understood the president reported to the members of 
the board. 


200 * 


Q. Which members of the board did you report the mat¬ 
ter to ? A. I couldn’t say. 

Q. Can you remember a single one ? A. That I couldn’t 
say, because the members of the board took very little in¬ 
terest in this matter, as there was nothing coming to them, 
and what they had come—as there was nothing coming to 
them ; I will stop right there, from the concern. 

Q. Well, do you want us to understand that you ex¬ 
plained the matter in full to the Board? A. I didn’t say 
that; no, sir? I say this collection was not made for a year, 
probably, after it was assigned. 

Q. Where were the books of the company kept in rhe 
meantime ? A. They were kept in the office. 

Q. Of the company ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You had charge of the office, didn’t you ? A. It was 
my office. 

Q. And the books were under your control ? A. No, they 
were in the control of the officers of the company up to that 
time. 

Q. And they were in your possession—in your office ? A. 
No, sir; they were not in my possession. 

Q. Do you mean to say by that, that you did not have 
access to them ? A. All the members had access; the sec¬ 
retary had possession of them. 

Q. Who was the secretary? A. Up to the time that he 
was discharged, why it was P. C. Bulkley. 

Q. Well, that was before you collected this money, was it 
not ? A. What was before ? 

Q. That he was discharged ? A. Yes, he was discharged 
before—long before. 

Q. Who was the secretary after him? A. There was 
none. 

Q. He was the last secretary ? A. He was the last. 

Q. Now, to which directors of the company did you make 
any explanation of that matter ? A. I made it to the presi¬ 
dent; as I say it was a year afterwards; I don’t know whether 
I made it personally or not; it was the president’s duty to 
make his reports to the board when they met. 

Q. Did you make any report to the board about it? A. I 
don’t know whether I did or not. 

Q. Is it your best impression that you did not ? A. I 
don’t know whether I did or not. I know that I reported to the 
president of course—all the transactions he knew daily ; he 
was watching that thing just as closely as I was ; we were 
tied and couldn’t get awayfrom it; we had to pay the debts. 


201 


Q. You were tlie ones that felt the most interest in the 
matter, because you had become liable for a large amount of 
the debts, and you had taken all the property to satisfy those 
debts, had you not ? A. Well, we were liable for the pay¬ 
ment of the purchase, and these assets were turned over to 
us to secure us for advancing this money. 

Q. And that is the way that you were liable and inter¬ 
ested in the matter ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The other directors didn’t have that same sort of inter¬ 
est? A. I should think not. 

Q. Some of the other stockholders of the Walls Company 
had made advances too, hadn’t they, for the purchase of that 
property ? A. Yes, they had made some, but they were 
small, my recollection now is—I have not seen the records of 
the company for a long time, and I certainly couldn’t state 
now, from memory, the amounts of those advances—that is, 
the amounts of the individual advances ; I know very well 
the original transaction—that is the amount it cost and the 
amount it paid ; I know I gave a check for $35,000 in Spring- 
field, for the first payment, and those claims that were signed 
turn them over to the assignee ; I remember that very well, 
because it was the feature of the whole case. 

Q. Now, in regard to the Central Savings Bank note ; at 
the time the company transferred that to you, you and the 
president arranged it, didn’t you ? A. We did, arranged 
what ? What do you mean ? 

Q. Arranged the transfer of the note to you ? A. No, 
no ; it was the company that did that. 

Q. Which member of the company did it ? A. The board. 

Q. The whole board did that, did they ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Transferred that note to you and O’Reilly ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. And can you remember now, since we are talking about 
it, whether it was .collateral or not ? A. I could not say. 

Q. But in regard to this matter of compensation of yours, 
that was a matter which was arranged solely by yourself 
and the president of the company ? A. It was at that time. 

Q. Well, it never was made at any other time, was it ? 
A. It was arranged by the president and myself for that 
service ; I made several trips to Springfield and remained 
there several days at a time and neglected my business and 
got no pay from the Big Muddy Iron Company, and that 
was the only compensation I ever received for about two 
years work. 


202 


Q. Of course you were also interested yourself in getting 
back that money, were you not ? A. What money ? 

Q. Getting back the amount of that note from the as¬ 
signee of the Walls Company ? A. There is no question 
about that. 

Q. You wanted that money to help pay the note which 
had been discounted, did you not ? A. Which note ? 

Q. The $10,000 note? A. I don’t remember whether that 
particular note was due then or not ? I don’t believe it was 
because that was a ninety day note and it vras either paid 
or renewed several time before the time of this collection. 

Q. Either paid or renewed several times before the date 
that you collected this money from the assignee of the Walls 
Company? A. I don’t think it was assigned specially for 
that note that we got discounted at the time; I am pretty 
sure it was not. 

Q. It was not ? A. I think not, because I think at that 
time the company was not in such a bad condition as she 
was afterwards. 

Q. Well, if it was not assigned at that time specially for 
that note, what was it assigned for ? A. For other moneys. 

Q. Advanced ? A. Advanced. 

Q. By you and him? A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Or was it advanced to you on account, to protect you 
against liability or endorsements? A. Oh, no; it was as¬ 
signed or transferred, I don’t know which, for either moneys 
advanced to the Company by ourselves or on our endorse¬ 
ments ; the company could not get one dollar out of bank 
without our endorsement, as she had no property and had 
no standing. 

Q. And these assignments were made to protect you 
against liability ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you think that this note was assigned in the same 
way—this claim against the Walls Company ? A. I know 
it; it was either assigned or transferred, I don’t know which. 

Q. It was assigned to you to protect you against liability 
on these endorsements or to secure your moneys which you 
had previously advanced ? A. Either one or the other, and 
I cannot say which. 

Q. You are sure, though, it was either one or the other? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know the firm of N. O. Nelson & Co ? A. I 
do ; you have not got through with that other question yet; 
you might as well get through with that Big Muddy iron 


203 


business, had’nt you ? You got into it, and have cut it short 

off. 

Q. Do you want to make any other statement in regard to 
that ? A. I do. 

Q. Well, sir, proceed. A. I believe one of the allegations 
made against me in this matter is this : Glover says that 
when there was some money missing, that I did’nt enter on 
the books of the company on the first of January, 1873, the 
sums of— 

Q. Well, I will ask you in regard to that. I will read to 
you what it says here in the petition : “ But that is not all. 
The referee said in his judgment: I find that the defend¬ 
ant company possessed an assigned claim of the Central 
Savings Bank against the Walls Company upon which the 
Treasurer collected an amount greater by $583.07 than the 
sum entered upon it in the list of assets upon the balance 
sheet of January 1, 1873. I find that of the assigned claims 
by stockholders against the AYalls Company the amount of 
$8,321 was collected and entered on the books of the com¬ 
pany, and the sum of $1,561.68 was collected by the Treas¬ 
urer and not placed upon the books.” This shortage was 
confirmed by the Circuit Court, and the judgment of the 
Circuit Court was affirmed by the Court of Appeals and the 
Supreme Court. The referee and the courts coldly and 
cruelly required the Treasurer, now the Surveyer, to pay up 
the exact sum of his embezzlement. I submit again, that 
any man who would commit the acts above detailed, has as 
much business in the Survey or ship of the Port, where there 
are unending opportunities for speculation, as a rat has in 
a grain bin, or a thief in a bank vault. These few remarks, 
I hope, will serve as additional inducements to the Surveyor 
to make the threatened exposure of myself. 

(Signed) John M. Glover. 

A. I thought I had not forgotten that that was in there. 
I find the amounts here now (referring to memorandum); the 
amount is 38 cents, not 7 cents. 

Q. This $583.07 is the $583.38 of which you have spoken 
here in your testimony this afternoon, is it ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And that you say was costs which you collected in this 
case of the associates against Shickle, Harrison & Co. ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Is that correct % A. That is partly correct. 

Q. Now, I will ask you whether or no that matter was 
not in the case of Bulkley against the Big Muddy Iron 



204 


Company, and whether the referee did not make a report 
in relation to that matter ? A. I cannot tell you what the 
referee done, sir. 

Q. You cannot tell anything about that ? A. No, sir; or 
what Bulkley done, or what anybody else said ; I don’t pro¬ 
pose to be able to tell that; I only know that if he makes 
any charge of that kind it is not true. 

Q. Well, you were a witness in that case, were you not? 
A. I was. 

A. And you made your explanation to the referee in that 
matter, did you not ? A. I did, sir ; I testified to the facts 
of that matter. 

Q. You filed an exception to the referee’s report in re¬ 
gard to it, didn’t you ? A. I cannot state what was done 
in that case ; I don’t know what the lawyers done ; I only 
know that the case was butchered, that’s all ; it was let go 
by default, because it wms understood by the attorneys that 
there was nothing in it; that was told to me and O’Reilly 
by the attorneys. 

Q. I don’t want to ask you any question in regard to that. 

A. The point that I want to make right here in connec¬ 
tion with this matter is that if there was such a report made 
it was false. 

[Counsel for the defendants objects to the witness making 
any statement not responsivee to the question asked him.] 

The Commissioner. [Addressing witness.] When your 
counsel comes to examine you, if he can show any good 
reason why the matter of the report should be explained, it 
can be gone into. 

The Witness. I supposed it might go right in here in 
connection with this whole matter, so that it would be all 
together. 

Q. Do you know the firm of N. 0. Nelson & Co.? A. 
Well, I don’t know that I do ; I don’t know who are the 
firm of N. O. Nelson & Co; I know N. O. Nelson and know 
that there is such a firm. 

Q. You know there is such a corporation, do you not ? 
A. I know that there is such a sign hanging up and they 
call themselves a company, a corporation, but to know posi¬ 
tively that it is a corporation I cannot say that I do, 

Q. You have know Mr. Nelson a long time, have you not? 

A. Yes, sir ; I have known Mr. Nelson for probably ten 
or twelve years. 


205 

Q. Have yon been in their establishment? A. I have 
been in there once or twice. 

Q. When ? A. Well, it was probablv two or three years 
ago. 

Q. Have yon been in their establishment within the last 
year ? A. I think not. 

Q. Sir? A. No, think not. 

Q. What business is that firm engaged in, or corporation ? 
A. I have understood that they were engaged in the busi¬ 
ness of supply men. 

Q. Yon understood that ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Bo yon know what business they are engaged in ? A. 
No, sir; except as furnishing and supply men. 

Q. Yon have not been in their place of business, yon say, 
for quite a long time ? A. I said so. 

Q. Did yon know whether they were also in the business 
of putting up heating apparatus and making repairs and 
things of that kind ? A. I did not until they came forward 
with a bid. 

Q. Until they came forward with a bid for what ? A. For 
repairing boilers and heating apparatue in the custom-house. 

Q. In the custom-house in this city ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. They did come forward and make such a bid, did they ? 
A. Yes, sir ; they came forward and made it. 

Q. What, if anything, did you do then to ascertain 
whether they were in a situation to make good any of their 
bids ? A. I instructed the engineer to ascertain and report 
to me ; if I had carried out his report I should have ignored 
their bids, but instead of that I did not; I sent for them to 
know if they would carry out their bid, if they would do the 
work for the bid. 

Q. Who did you send for ? A. N. O. Nelson. 

Q. Did you see him ? A. That is my recollection. 

Q. You saw Nelson? A. Yes, sir; that is my recollec¬ 
tion. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with him in regard to 
the matter ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was his conversation ? A. I asked him if they 
would do the work according to the bid—for $2,100 and 
something; I had information before this which proved to 
me they could not do it, and I didn’t want a botched job. 

Q. You had the information before that they could not 
do the work ? A. Yes, sir ; for that money. 

Q. From whom did you get that information? A. I got 
that from the engineer, and he had it from his own personal 


206 


experience, and tlie experience of the Assistant Supervising 
Architect of the Treasury Department, that was here a 
short time previous ; they made an examination of the work 
to be done, and made a calculation of what it would cost to 
do it, and when Mr. Nelson got this bid the engineer said 
to me, “ Ignore it; throw it out; don’t pay any attention 
to it; they cannot do the work.” 

Q. If you will confine yourself to answering the questions 
asked, we will get along a little more rapidly, Mr. Lancas¬ 
ter. A. I do ; you wanted to know what I did. 

Q. Did you make any inquiries as to whether the firm of 
N. 0. Nelson was a responsible firm or not? A. As far as 
their responsibility is concerned, I know nothing about 
them. 

Q. You had no information in regard to their responsi¬ 
bility ? A. I did hear some time ago that they were in a 
pretty bad condition ; that they had mortgaged their prop¬ 
erty and turned it into a co-operative concern. 

Q. Before this bid was made ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Turned it into a co-operative concern ? A. I heard so ; 
but what the concern was, I could not tell you ; I do not 
know their responsibility. 

Q. You didn’t know that they were not responsible, did 
you ? A. I didn’t know that they were or were not respon¬ 
sible for the contract they would make, and in this case 
there was no bond required at the time of making this bid. 

Q. You knew that they had done part of the work in the 
custom house at the time it was put up, or when it was be¬ 
ing finished, did you not ? A. I did hear that they had 
done a part of this work, that turned out not to be done 
properly. 

Q. You heard that they had done part of the work, did 
you not ? A. I have answered that; I heard that they had 
furnished some of the heating apparatus. 

Q. And they made you this bid to do this work for some¬ 
thing, over how much did you say ? A. The first bid was 
$2,100 and something, or it may be $2,200 or something 
along there. 

Q. You had a conversation with Mr. Nelson in regard to 
that, did you not? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And in that conversation, did he say that he could not 
do that work according to the specifications for that amount ? 
A. My recollection is that I asked him if he would complete 
that work according to the specification, and he looked for 
a minute—said that he did’nt know, and for me to let him 


207 


withdraw liis bid for a little while, and I wanted to know 
for how long, and he said it would not be more than that 
day. I know distinctly that I insisted if he was going to 
make a bid that he was going to stand by, that I wanted it, 
because I wanted to commence the work before the cold 
weather set in ; Judge Treat was pushing me. 

Q. You did’nt say all of those things to Mr. Nelson, did 
you ? A. I did, sir. 

Q. You said all of that to Nelson? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then go on with your statement. A. I showed him 
the necessity of this work being done—the urgency of it; 
told him that Judge Treat had at that time, I believe, issued 
an order of Court compelling me to heat up the building, 
and Mr. Nelson made his bid in accordance with that idea, 
and stated that he would do the work, I think the bid says, 
within fifteen days from the time it was awarded. 

Q. That is the conversation that you had with him at that 
time? A. Yes, sir; the bid was withdrawn and he came 
back and raised it a thousand dollars. 

Q. Now, had you, before you sent for him, received any 
bids from any other person ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. From whom ? . A. I received one from Smith, Beggs & 
Rankin ; one from Moon—I forget his initials, but he is in 
the foundry business ; there are three branches of that work. 

Q. From who else did you receive any ? A. I received one 
from another party but I have forgotten his name, and I 
tried to get a bid from Gerard B. Allen &. Co.; that is not 
the name of the firm ; I have forgotten the name of the firm. 

Q. The Fulton Iron Works? A. Y r es, sir; the Fulton 
Iron Works. 

Q. Did you get a bid from them. A. No, sir ; they finally 
refused. 

Q. But you had three bids then besides that of N. 0. Nel¬ 
son & Co ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And those bids were considerably higher than N. 0. 
Nelson & Company’s bid, were they not ? A. Oh, yes, sir; 
a good deal. 

Q. Did you tell him that ? A. No, sir ; I did not. 

Q. You gave him no information about that? A. None 
whatever. 

Q. You merely inquired of him whether he was able to do 
the work according to the specification for the amount of his 
bid ? A. That is what I asked him. 

Q. Did you tell him that you believed that he could not 
get it done for that ? A. I did not; I didn’t go into any 


208 


history of that kind with him ; I wanted to know what he 
would do. 

Q. Then he asked leave to withdraw the bid ? A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. And yon permitted him to withdraw it ? A. I did, 
which I should not have done. 

Q. And then he came back with another bid, raising it to 
about a thousand dollars higher, is that correct ? A. I 
already stated that once or twice. 

Q. Now, what is the amount of the bid as they finally 
handed it in ; was it $3,167.50 ? A. I think that is about 
the sum. 

Q. Their bid was the lowest bid of all those that were 
received, was it not? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Now, did you go to their place after receiving this 
bid to inform yourself as to whether they could do the 
work or not % A. I did not. . 

Q. Did you send for Mr. Nelson and have any further 
talk with him in regard to it ? A. No, sir. 

Q. You wrote a letter to the Treasury Department in re¬ 
lation to the matter, did you not ? A. I did. 

Q. Where is the letter now % A. It is in the Treasury 
Department, I assume. 

Q. Did you keep a copy of it here ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is that copy ? A. In the Assistant Custodian’s 
Office, in the letter-book. 

Q. In the Custom House here ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you seen a copy of that letter printed in the 
papers ? A. I have. 

Q. Can you state whether the printed copy or the copy as 
printed is correct or not ? A. I would not say for I have 
not compared it with the original letter. 

Q. How much was the next lower bid—the next lowest 
bid, higher than that of Nelson’s % A. My recollection is 
that Moon’s bid was $4,250, and Smith, Beggs, & Hankin’s 
bid was $4,300, and the fourth one was in the neighborhood 
of $4,400 or $4,500, or somewhere along there ; I don’t re. 
member exactly the exact sum, but I remember the other 
two very well ; they were nearly the same. 

Q. You recommended the acceptance of the bid of Smith, 
Beggs & Rankin, did you % A. I did; I sent all the bids on 
to the Department with the recommendation that the bid 
be awarded to Smith, Beggs & Rankin. 

Q. And that they were the higher bidders ? A. I stated 
so in the communication—the letter; I recommended that 


209 


that the bid be awarded to them for the reason that I knew 
they were responsible, and I had confidence in their ability 
as mechanics to do the work. 

Q. And yon knew, at that time, nothing of the responsi¬ 
bility of IN’. O. Nelson, did you ? A. No, sir; except what 
I told you—that is, that the engineer wanted me to ignore 
their bid. that it was a “guess of that concern, ” those are the 
words that he used, and that I should ignore it altogether 
and pay no attention to it. 

Q. That was your engineer ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is his name ? A. William Davis. 

Q. Who appointed him ? A. I did. 

Q. How long had you known him ? A. I had known him 
for some time. 

Q. For how long ? A. Probably a year or over. 

Q. Only a year ? A. Personally, not as long as a year, I 
don’t think; it may have been a little more than a year. 

Q. Was Mr. Davis a friend of yours? A. No, sir; he 
came highly recommended as a first-class engineer. 

Q. And you did’nt know him longer than a year, you say ? 
A. I don’t think I did. 

Q. And that was the only information you had in regard 
to the N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company—this that 
your engineer told you ? A. In regard to this transaction ? 
Q. Yes, sir; I mean in regard to this transaction? A. 
Well, Mr. Hatch is the Assistant Custodian, and I got some 
of my information from him. 

Q. Mr. Hatch, is a lawyer, is he not? A. Yes, sir; a 
lawyer, and I got some of my information from him and got 
his advice about the matter, which I also ignored in regard 
to throwing the bid out. 

Q. He had no practical experience in regard to matters of 
that kind, had he ? A. Not any more than I have, that I 
know of. 

Q. \~ou don’t know that he ever went to their concern, do 
you, to make any inquiries in relation to the matter ? A. 
i could not tell you whether he did or not. 

Q. Have you stated all the sources of information that 
you exhausted in relation to the matter ? A>. I think I have 

in regard to that transaction. 

Q. Then in regard to this transaction the only persons 
with whom you spoke were Mr. Davis, your engineer, and 
Mr. Hatch, "the Assistant Custodian, who is a lawyer ? A. 
And a report that they made to me of their experience and 
knowledge in the business. 


210 


Q. A report which Hatch and Davis made to you ? A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. And upon that information you wrote the letter which 
you wrote to the Treasury Department in relation to this 
matter ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The Treasury Department finally awarded the contract 
to the Nelson Manufacturing Company, did it not, or di¬ 
rected you to do so ? A. No, sir ; the Treasury Department 
wrote me back to demand a bid—a bond I should say—of the 
N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company for $2,500, that if they 
would furnish us with sufficient bond to that amount, to 
then award the contract to that concern. 

Q. Well, you did that, did you not ? A. I sent for them, 
and told them what was required. Nelson first thought 
that he would not furnish a bond, but finally he agreed to 
furnish a bond signed by himself and secretary, I think, 
which I finally accepted, after they swore they were worth 
$2,500 outside of the concern. We had some little contro¬ 
versy about the security in the bond. 

Q. Well, they gave a bond, didn’t they ? A. They signed 
a bond, and swore that they were worth so much outside of 
the concern that they were officers of. 

Q. The company gave a bond, and Mr. Nelson and some¬ 
body else became the securities ? A. Yes, sir ; somebody 
else, but I have forgotten his name ; I turned that matter 
over to Mr. Hatch, as it was his business to attend to it. 

Q. And they qualified ? A. I approved the bond and 
awarded the contract to them and they started in to do the 
work in October ; they did some of the work ; probably one- 
fourth of it is done now. 

Q. You think not more than one-fourth ? A. Not more 
than one-fourth, from the report of the engineer. 

Q. You are not an expert in matters of that kind, are 
you ? A. No, sir ; I take it, as I say, from the report of 
the engineer ; I have watched the thing, however, closely 
myself and I know what is necessary to be done in the 
matter. 

Q. Was there any feeling between N. O. Nelson and 
yourself in this matter, growing out of stop-boxes? A. 
None whatever. Mr. Nelson and my firm had a contract in 
regard to that matter, which we carried out to the letter as 
long as it lasted ; we had no trouble or feeling about the 
matter as far as I am concerned. 

Q. Then you have stated all the sources of information 
that you inquired of in regard to the standing of the con- 


211 


cern of the N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Company, and in 
regard to their ability to do the work that they undertook 
to do by this bid ? A. I have ; I have stated that, I believe, 
three or four times. 

Q. Well, I want to be sure that there were no others— 
that you had forgotten none. A. I don’t think I have ; if 
you will allow me to state what I have found out since in 
regard to their business, why- 

Q. No, sir ; not since. 

At this point counsel for defendant asks that the matter 
of the objection heretofore made by plaintiff ’ s counsel to the 
question propounded to the witness on the 18th of April as 
follows : ‘ ‘ Did you or did you not have the assent of the 
the customers for the application of their money that way, ’ ’ 
be certified^to the court ; whereupon counsel for plaintiff 
withdraws his objection, and said question is now repeated 
as follows : 

Q. Mr. Lancaster, did you or did you not have the assent 
of the customers of your firm for the application of their 
money in that way ? A. What is the question before that, 
I don’t know what connection that is in. 

Q. You stated in your examination in answer to questions 
put by Mr. Glover as follows : 

‘ ‘ In the other cases where you have previously stated that 
the loans were pledged, that the mortgages were pledged 
with the firm for money, was it money of customers that was 
being used in that way ? A. Yes, sir. 

“ Q. With their assent, I suppose? A. Well, I don’t 
know that they all assented to it or not. 

“ Q. You don’t mean to say you would do it without their 
assent ? A. I mean to say the money was used that way and 
these people all got their money from Lancaster & Tiernan. 
I don’t owe anybody. 

“ Q. you don’t mean to say you would take their money 
from the firm without their assent ? A. I don’t know why. 

“Q. Do you say so ? A. I did not say so.” Now comes the 
question : “ Did you or did you not have the assent of the 
customers for the application of their money that way?” 
A. We did not have any money to loan—we did not have 
any money of eustomers to be loaned. 

Q. Did you have the assent of the customers to the use 
of their money in this way, Mr. Lancaster ? A. No ; I say 
with an explanation, no, I did not, because we had no money 
of the customers to be loaned out in any way. 

Q. Then you used the money in taking mortgages of this 



212 


kind to yourself without their knowledge or consent ? A. 
No ; as I said before, they had no moneys to be loaned on 
mortgages, or to be invested in any way. 

Q. But the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan? A. Let me an¬ 
swer the question ; and when I found I had overdrawn my 
account, the mortgages were put up for the purpose of se¬ 
curing those people that I owed. 

Q. Then you drew out the moneys of the firm for your in¬ 
dividual purposes withont your customers knowing about it ? 
A. There is no doubt about that. 

Q. When you found you had done that you turned in 
these mortgages as collateral ? A. Yes, sir ; to secure them. 

Q. You never told them anything about it ? A. No, they 
knew nothing about it. 

Q. They knew nothing about it; they did not invest their 
money to be loaned out in this way ; to be used by you for 
these purposes ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Sir? A. No ; we had no money of customers to be 
loaned out; that is, if we had money, it was loaned out in 
the usual way, on mortgages. 

Q. If you had money to loan out it was loaned in the 
usual way, you mean? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. But the money you collected for them was not to be 
loaned out but was to be held for them subject to their call ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you used it ? A. Yes, sir ; whefti they called they 
got their money. In connection with that I want to say 
they always got their money ; I don’t say that this deed of 
trust was always kept in the hands of Mr. Tiernan, because 
many a time these deeds of trust were deposited in the bank 
for the purpose of getting discounts and getting overdrafts 
sometimes when we required them. 

Q. Whose deed of trust was that then ? A. Why it was 
the deed of trust of Butler in this case. 

Q. Who did it belong to ? A. It belonged to me. 

Q. Belonged to you ? A. certainly it did. 

Q. You transferred it to Tiernan ? A. I did because he 
was interested in the firm as I was. 

Q He had no interest in the capital of the firm, you said ? 
A. He had not. 

Q. He was not responsible for any losses? A. Yes, sir; 
if the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan had gone into bankruptcy 
and we could not pay our debts he would be held responsi¬ 
ble under the law as I understand it. 

Q. Under the law ? A. Yes, if I could not pay it and if 


213 


lie liad anything they could fall on he would have to pay it 
and for that very reason I wanted to protect him and all 
others in the legitimate obligations I owed. 

Q. For that reason you were afraid you might go into 
bankruptcy ? A. If I had went in I could not have paid 
my debts at that time. 

Q. When ? A. At the time of 1875 and 1876. 

Q. In 1875 and 1876? A. In 1875 and 1876, along there, 
if I was compelled to pay my debts at that time I could not 
do it, the obligations were for more than I had, but as I said 
before, I worked it out just in this way and paid everybody 
I owed. 

Q. Now, to come back to the proposition : by your agree¬ 
ment with Mr. Tiernan he was not to be responsible for any 
of the debts as between you and him, was he? A. No, of 
course, with that understanding, of course I would pay as 
long as I had to pay and I made up a calculation, I could 
see I could work it out. 

Q. You had been overdrawing your account, and in that 
way had been using moneys and funds of your customers 
that were in your hands ? A. I used some of it that way. 

Q. How much of it did you use that way ? I could not 
tell how much. 

Q. Did you use as much as $15,000 or $20,000 that way ? 
A. Oh, yes; I owed as much as $20,000 or $25,000 some¬ 
times. 

Q. The-firm had some capital of its own ? A. It had no 
capital. 

Q. You had capital in the firm ? A. I did. 

Q. How much ? A. Everything I owned was in the firm 
—not in the firm, there is where I make a mistake, if I should 
not have caught on to what you said. The capital did not 
belong to the firm. (To the stenographer.) Head that to 
me again. 

(Question repeated.) A. “ You had money in the firm,’’ 
I don’t understand how to answer that except it was mine 
and not the firm’s. 

Q. You had money invested in the business of the firm, 
didn’t you? A. No, sir. 

Q. No money invested in the business of the firm ? A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Not a dollar ? A. No, sir. 

Q. Well, you had been drawing moneys out of the firm ? 
A. I say no, in the way you put it, the firm did not ad¬ 
vance any money—it did not invest any money. 




214 


Q. Did you invest money in tlie business of the firm ? A. 
What was the business ? 

Q. You were conducting the business you know ? A. I 
did not have to invest a dollar in the business of the firm. 

Q. You did not? A. No, sir. 

Q. The firm had no capital ? A. The firm had no capital 
to be invested as a firm. 

Q. And you had no money invested in the firm ? A. All 
I had was to my credit individually. 

Q. Where ? In the firm books ? A. To my account, it 
belonged to me. 

Q. In the firm books ? A. There were no firm books con¬ 
nected with what T owned, with what belonged to me. 

Q. No books kept between Tiernan and yourself ? A. As 
far as profits were concerned, yes. 

Q. On those firm books was an entry made of what money 
you advanced for the firm from time to time ? A. I did not 
advance any money for the firm. 

Q. Were you charged on those books with money you 
drew out from time to time ? A. I was charged—I cannot 
say—it was charged to my account, everything I drew out 
of course. 

Q. Was it or not ? A. For what purpose ? 

Q. Any purpose, any money that you drew out ? A. Every¬ 
thing I drew it was charged up to my individual account. 

Q. When you paid any money back or when there was a 
division of the profits you received a credit, didn’t you ? A. 
It went to my credit, everything that belonged to me went 
to my credit. 

Q. On the firm books ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Sir ? A. I assume it was credited on the firm books, 
yes. 

Q. In regard to this note of Butler’s for $8,000, did you 
transfer it to Tiernan individually or to the firm of Lancas¬ 
ter & Tiernan ? A. No, I cannot say that he held it all the 
time. 

Q. You said in your answer to Mr. Glover— ? A. I think 
the banks held it some portion of the time as well as Tier¬ 
nan, but Tiernan had control of it for the purpose of pro¬ 
tecting the customers the firm did business for. 

Q. Now, aside from the money which you drew out of the 
concern for the Big Muddy Iron Company, you also drew 
money for your living expenses, did’nt you? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Quite a considerable sum from time to time ? A. Yes’ 
sir. 


215 


Q. Were those overdrafts ? Did that make the overdraft 
or what made the overdraft of your account in the firm ? A. 
Everything I drew out altogether of course. 

Q. When did you begin to overdraw ? A. Along in 1875 
and 1876, I guess. 

Q. Not before 1875 ? A. I am not sure about that. 

Q,. Sir? A. I am not certain about that, I don’t think I 
did. 

Q. How was it about—? A. Oh, yes, 1874; in 1874 I 
paid obligations that came along, I had a large bank account, 
and of course an obligation that came along that day I paid 
it, and so on. 

Q. That is the firm had a large bank account you mean ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is of rents and moneys belonging to customers ? 
A. Yes, sir ; and of my own at that time. 

Q. How about that note of $9,500, was that also pledged 
to Tiernan ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was that pledged in advance of money that you took 
for it or after you had taken the money ? A. Which note 
of $9,500 do you refer to now? 

Q. Well, was there more than one ? A. I don’t know 
the one you refer to. 

Q. I will ask you whether there was more than one note 
of $9,500? 

Mr. Laugiilin. I submit he has been through all that. 

Mr. Klein. No, I have not, not that. 

The Witness. Yes, sir ; you have been through that, if 
you mean the James Tiernan note. 

By Mr. Klein ; 

Q. Not this branch. I refer to the James Tiernan note of 
$9,500 ? A. Well, the James Tiernan note was a note given 
by Tiernan, not by me. 

Q. I ask you wdiether you pledged that to your partner 
Tiernan before or after you had taken money of the custom¬ 
ers of the firm out of the concerm ? A. No, Tiernan got 
that note from his brother, I did not. 

Q. You had nothing to do with that ? A. That is my re¬ 
collection that the property was sold, Tiernan paid cash for it 
and gave a deed of trust, and that deed of trust was afterwards 
turned over to Tiernan when his brother arranged with him, 
that is as to getting his money back ; that is my recoollec- 
tion. 



216 


Q. Did he get the money out of the iirm ? A. Did who 
get money ? 

Q. Your partner, Mr. Tiernan? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion on the ground that it has been answered.] 

Q. Did you have nothing at all. to do with that $9,500 
note ? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion on the ground that this matter has been fully examined 
about, that the question has been asked and answered; ob¬ 
jection overruled.] 

Q. Did you have nothing to do with that $9,500 note? 
A. In what particular. 

Q. In any particular ? A. I stated all Iliad to do with it 
up to the time that Tiernan gave it to his brother; now I 
had nothing to do with it that I know of afterwards. 

Q. What did you have to do with it up to the time that 
Tiernan gave it to his brother ? A. Nothing; I did not have 
it at all. / 

Q. Then do you mean to be understood now as saying that 
you had nothing whatever to do with that note at any time ? 
A. I mean to say that I had nothing to do with that note 
before Tiernan gave it to his brother. 

Q. Did you have anything to do with it after that ? A. 

I don’t know that I did, except to pay it, that is when the 
accounts got in such a condition, when my earnings became 
sufficient to release that property, it was released just in that 
way. 

Q. When your earnings became sufficient ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you mean the earnings in the firm ? A. The earn¬ 
ings in the firm, and the moneys I received along sometime 
after this note was given, a good while after. 

Q. Yes; well, why did you pay the note out of your earn¬ 
ings ? 

Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion on the ground that this has all been investigated ; ob¬ 
jection overruled. 

Q. The question is why did you pay that note if it was 
not your note to pay ? A. Because I got the property back 
by paying it ? 

Q. You got the property back by paying it ? A. Certain- 



217 


ly; and I paid it out of the earnings and out of moneys re¬ 
ceived long after this note was made. 

Q. Out of the earnings of the firm ? A. Out of the earn¬ 
ings of my business. 

Q. All these transactions were entered in the firm’s books, 
were they ? A. I cannot say as to that. 

Q. Were any of them entered there ? 

[Mr. Lauglilin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the question 
on the ground that it has been asked and answered before ; 
objection overruled. ] 

A. I cannot say whether they have or not. Now these 
transactions of that kind, I cannot say whether they were 
entered on my books or not, as they did not belong to the 
firm ; I am not positive whether I entered them on the books 
of the firm or not, or had them entered by Mr. Tiernan. 

Q. In what books was your individual account kept, that 
is your individual account with the co-partnership contain¬ 
ing these transactions ? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion as immaterial and incompetent ; objection overruled.] 

A. I don’t know whether there was any account kept of 
these sales of my individual transactions with the firm or not, 
that is in the firm books; as the property did not belong to 
the firm I have my doubts whether they were ever entered, 
and I do not think they were. 

Q. You say a portion of these notes were at times used 
in bank ? A. I do. 

Q. By whom ? A. By the firm, of course. 

Q. By the firm of Lancaster & Tiernan ? A. When we 
wanted money I did not ask for it on my own account ; it 
was borrowed on account of the firm. 

Q. Then you took those notes as collateral to the bank ? 
A. The collaterals were put up in this way. 

Q. Were those transactions entered on the books? A. 
Oh, yes ; when discounts were made they were entered, of 
course. 

Q. They were entered ; on whose account and to whose 
credit were the discounts placed ? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion ; objection overruled.] 

A. I could not say positively; I suppose they were en¬ 
tered though to the credit of the firm. 



218 


Mr. Laughlin. You need not suppose anything ; if you 
don’t know, say so. 

The Witness. I say that is my theory and my recollec¬ 
tion, as far as I can remember. 

By Mr. Klien : 

Q. To the credit of the firm; did the firm have an account 
with itself in its own books ? A. No, not that I remember. 

Q.' Then you are mistaken in your last answer or theory ? 
A. What I meant to say about the discount is it is entered 
up in the cash book- 

Q. In the cash book ? A. First into the bank book, and 
I assume—I don’t know whether these entries have been 
made in the cash book or not. 

Q. You do not know ? A. I won’t say, as I did not keep 
the books. 

Q. You won’t say they were so entered in the cash book? 
A. I won’t say because I don’t know about all those trans¬ 
actions. 

Q. Any of them? A. I won’t say it now because I can¬ 
not positively say because I did not keep the books myself. 

Q. Is that the only reason why you cannot answer the 
question, because you did not keep the books ? A. That is 
the reason I give, that I don’t know positively that they 
were entered and went through the books or not. 

Q. That is the reason you give ; I ask you if that is the 
only reason you can give? A. I don’t know of any other 
reason at this time. The transactions occurred so long ago 
I haven’t them in my memory at this time, I can’t retain 
them. 

Q. How often were these notes used as collateral in bank 
before you got back all this property ? A. Oh, I couldn’t 
tell that. 

Q. More than once ? A. I think so. 

Q. More than twice ? A. I couldn’t tell, I won’t attempt 
to answer because I don’t know. 

Q. You don’t know ; in point of fact were they not al¬ 
most continuously in bank after you received them ? A. I 
cannot say as to that. 

Q. Why not! A. They were continuously pledged either 
in the bank or with Tiernan until the transactions were 
closed. 

Q. Until the transactions were closed, that is these real 
estate transactions of which you have been testifying ? A. 



219 • 


In regard to these real estate transactions and the moneys 
borrowed and advanced on them. 

Q. The moneys borrowed and advanced on those transac¬ 
tions? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And those were the moneys you speak of as having 
been borrowed from the hrm, being the moneys of your cus¬ 
tomers ? A. Some of it. 

Q. Was it some of it, or all of it? A. I won’t say all of 
it; some of it of course. 

Q. How much belonged to your customers, and how much 
did not belong to them ? A. I could’nt tell you that. 

Q. Hid any of it belong to you individually? A. No, 
sir; I did’ nt have it, if I had the money individually—I 
paid all I had out before I commenced borrowing. 

Q. Then who did the money belong to, if it did not belong 
to your customers, and none of it belonged to you ? A. To 
the banks. 

Q. You don’t mean to say you had money belonging to 
the banks in your possession ? A. I mean to say in answer 
to your question who it belonged to—who I borrowed it 
from, I answer I think it belonged to the banks, the money 
I borrowed from the banks; the money I borrowed from the 
banks, I think it belonged to the banks. \ 

Q. That is your idea ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The money you borrowed from the banks you were re¬ 
sponsible to pay to the banks again ? A. Certainly. 

Q. While you had it it was your money ? A. Mine while 
I had it; no, I don’t consider it was. Of course while I had 
possession it was, of course you might say it was mine. I 
suppose you might say this is mine now (picking up a pen¬ 
cil case) as long as I have possession of it, but it is not, al¬ 
though I have got possession of it at this time, this case. 
In the same sense I don’t think that money belonged to me, 
because I owed it, I borrowed it. 

Q. What I want to get at is how much of the money you 
borrowed from your hrm belonged to customers, and how 
much did not belong to customers ? A. That I could not 
tell you, because I used a good deal of money just about 
that time. 

Q. I mean for these real estate transactions ? A. I couldn’t 
tell you ? 

Q. As much as $15,000 ? A. Sometimes more than that, 
I think. 

Q. Sometimes more ? A. I couldn’t tell you the amount. 



220 


I Q. You know about these particular transactions, don’t 
you? A. Generally I do; particularly, I do not. 

Q. You know they were these transactions that you have 
been speaking of here ? A. What do you refer to ? 

Q. The real estate transactions ? A. I have answered 
that fully, I think. 

Q. I say you knew those transactions, didn’t you? A. I 
did. 

Q. Now, how much money did you use belonging to your 
customers for those transactions? A. I couldn’t tell that. 

Q. $15,000? A. I couldn’t say. 

Q. $20,000? I couldn’t say. 

Q. Was it more or less at different times ? A. Of course 
it was sometimes more and sometimes less; it could not be 
the same amount, because it was a continuous transaction, 
you might say, with the overdrafts, you might call it, and 
borrowing from the banks and so on. 

Q. All these transactions in this real estate matter were 
about the same time, were they not ? A. Oh, no. 

Q. How much difference of time was there between them ? 
A. Well, they commenced in 1874, when the company burst, 
and when the Joliet Iron and Steel Company burst, they 
commenced ; that was prior to the time that I signed this 
Busby bond, a short time prior. 

Q. Well, you made none of those real estate transactions 
concerning which you have testified prior to the signing of 
that Busby bond, did you ? A. I did. 

Q. Which one? A. That $11,000 note ; I forget now the 
exact sum. 

Q. That was, you say, before you signed the Busby bond ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is that the only one ? A. I don’t know whether I 
sold any property prior- 

Q. I mean property that you got back again in the way 
you have testified to here ? A. I have forgotten now the 
time I sold the Thirteenth street property to Butler ; I don’t 
know what date that was. 

Q. You can’t remember whether it was before or after the 
Busby bond? A. I cannot say whether it was before or 
after I signed the bond. 

Q. Don’t you know it was after? A. I can’t say. 

Q. Don’t you know it was shortly before you made your 
application to be released from liability on that bond ? A. 
I could not say what time it was. 

Q. Sir ? A. I could not say what time it was. 



221 


Q. You remember making an application to be released 
from that bond, don’t yon ? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When was that application made ? A. AYhich appli¬ 
cation now do you refer to, to be released from the bond, or 
released from the judgment \ 

Q. From the judgment A. I made application to be re¬ 
leased from the bond probably fifty or sixty days after I 
signed it, by notifying the collector that his bond was not 
good, that I found out it was in that condition, that I was 
not responsible for the amount I qualified for. I saw the 
date there of that application a day or two ago, I saw it in 
the petition rather, I don’t know whether that is dated 
correct or not, but I suppose it is. 

Q. That petition says it was about the 14th of Septem¬ 
ber. 1876. A. I think it was because- 

. Q. Sir \ A. I think it read so because if I remember 
right I read it a few days ago. 

Q. Was that in 1876 ? A. The record is there, the peti¬ 
tion is there, you have got it in your papers ; .1 could not 
tell, I think it is though. 

Q. Who was your attorney in that matter % A. M. A. 
Bryson. 

Q. Did he live here ? 

[Mr. Lauglilin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion as having been gone over before; the commissioner 
sustains the objection.] 

Q. You presented a petition, did you not, to the District 
Court at Springfield, Illinois, in regard to that note which 
you got from the Central Savings Bank asking for an order 
on the assignee to pay that over to you, pay the amount 
over to you ? A. I don’t remember that. 

Q. Will you say that you did or did not make such a 
petition ? A. I cannot say ; I went up there for the pur¬ 
pose of collecting and paying off all the debts, and paying 
off or settling—in other words for the payment of the furn¬ 
ace, and to receive whatever assets were belonging to the 
associates after such payment ; now whether there was a 
petition—I do not think it was necessay to have a petttion. 

Q. Was there not a petition in regard to that particular 
note presented by you ? A. I don’t think so, for the rea¬ 
son of that particular note the company was put in bank¬ 
ruptcy, therefore I do not see how- 

Q. On the particular note which you afterwards came to 
be the owners of % A. Yes, sir. 




222 


Q. And yon don’t remember that there was a petition in 
regard to that ? A. Oh, there was a petition which put the 
company in bankruptcy. 

Q. I mean the petition to the court asking the assignee to 
pay that money over to you ; A. Oh, no, that amount was 
proven up by the bank. 

Q. Didn’t the petition state that the bank had made a 
transfer of that claim to you ? 

[Mr. Laughlin, counsel for plaintiff, objects to the ques¬ 
tion ; objection sustained.] 

Q. Do you remember anything about a petition of that 
kind? A. I do not. 

Q. You won’t say that none was presented? A. I can’t 
say that a petition was presented ; I don’t see how it could 
be from the fact that the claim was proved up by the Cen¬ 
tral Savings Bank, the company was put in bankruptcy on 
that very note, it was held by the bank. 

Q. I ask you whether you will state—A. I don’t know 
anything except a power of attorney or a certificate to the 
effect that it did not belong to the bank was presented, 
probably that was done, I cannot say. 

Q. You don’t remember anything about it ? A. I cannot 
tell now, no, sir. 

























































































. 







































. 


- 











































































































































* ( 
vir 


$ K 






0* ,•*!?* **X a 4 V o*f •« "<*> •• A° 

•>o x »/.# .v^mV. r* s t :m %>>. • 


» i 


o K 


»°v 


40 * J5£i LJ«&. «• 

• - <o n? <£ < 

. v ^ .*0* ***** *> 
* * 58 |£y* \fL > 4 ® A * 






6 



aV * 

* -■' 

“VJ* ♦ 

* V * 


rs # 

*•*• .« v % ’*.;•’ 

tf -**T- **<* :jlS*' V 

•O ..-. T . A * ^W!* . 

> * A V *%* *0 V O, *»,,* A > V 

■||' > _,^ ,V«$W, \ 0 ° Sx/r^L' °o A * 1 ^ 1 * ** 

. • ft ' A °' °o k f'^SsfiSh ^ 

5 ®.' J, 0 ^ '??%m§: /t°* ’ 

' f° . V •».»• ({,♦ -=. *. . 1 ’ ycr A. -T. . • ’ A 

ar .Wa?» *, ,«' ^ „ v .• 


'’bv* 






*/* fj* 


* «v* *0>. 

.0 T "b *?.?«* *4 

^ -Cr 4 * *Af * **©. J-' 6 

;• 5. 0 v : 



* ^ A 

0 


VV 



« 5 > yv o • 

#^|wy« ^ ' $ 

<■> ‘Tf^T* ^ ^>. •• 

* * « - V 

!■ o' i_ 

: ^ 5 °^ ;1 v: ,c 




•*\/, °o % T^*‘ o'>' ''\ V ft 

v' ..• cv , 0 ^ .••■>. *> v' .••*» ft-f 

•’Jill' tr •!»■ w :®R*: 

.c, J>. 1«5«3K5S. .V>. 

-v <? 0 


^ *.w 

'. O. A* ,••*• 

^ jJ » 

h° 

\r K **•••* 

r 4 Va» «s, a- . 

. m^ 7 A% %.<* : 

* wmm? * cf> ^ifK a 



V^v \W\WV 

r.v <? .•iza-. t, /.^.v 


* ^ 0 Y 
; : 

»* ^ <\ . 
a 9 ...., •*-. 

V »A4’ •£ 






4 ^ 



« "< 7 * 0' «V^v* ^ 

; ^o< *: ^ 

* •lft^»* 4.° 

111 .* *►* <> *? :! W‘.‘ 


•* 4 * ^ *1 

...» . 0 ' V *•#..•• *▼ ©.'•.T*' i 0 

♦* , v v \ ** , 



*♦ aV*^, 

* ^ ^ 



r * C^' ^jv «% 

1 * ^ 4 <* * 

**•*' a <* •rjTT** . 0 ^ '»?,a j / **7 

-h •iir* ^ o^ .*•♦. ♦o a v .% • 

✓CRT •jSSJ^tU* • mjpfmfi S"' 

W.NDfNC I ^ ^ JiS 


WERT 

bookbisoinc 

Crantvillc 
Sept,— Oc, 1967 

Wrt Qu+hty Bound 


-*-o x 


■»b^ 


. 0 ^. 





































